3 Correct one another not in anger but in peace,
15.3-4 7. On Church Discipline (15.3-4)
3 Correct one another not in anger but in peace, as you have [received] it in the gospel; and let no one speak to anyone who wrongs anoth er—let him not hear [a word] from you —until he has repented.
4 Perform your prayers and your almsgiving and all that you undertake as you have [received] it in the gospel of our Lord.
Comment Analysis After the digression in Did. 15.1-2 the Didachist returns to the theme introduced in 14.1-3. Thus 15.3-4 would more logically follow 14.3.1 In my opinion 15.3-4 is again redactional, which means that it comes from the pen of the Didachist.2 Characteristic of him is the double reference to the "gospel." The presupposition for the entire passage to follow is the image of the com munity as an eschatological brotherand sisterhood in which mutual peace reigns, and in which each member
■ 3 The section begins with the commandment of mutu al fraternal/sororal correction: eXeyx^Te ocXXrjXovg.4
One brother or sister engages in dialogue with another, confronts him or her with the fault committed, and calls him or her to repentance (cf. Matt 18:15 par.).5 But this correction should not be done in wrath; rather it should be (as we would now say) "nonaggressive" and should not destroy the brotherly or sisterly harmony between the one doing the correcting and the one who is cor rected: prj ev opyij aAA' ev elprivri ("not in anger but in peace").6 The admonition to meet one another not in an aggressive manner but with a harmonious attitude is something that can be read in the "gospel" (cog e'xere ev is responsible for the others. The community itself exer cises the right of discipline, and the most extreme means at its disposal is excommunication. An appeal to institutions outside the community is still unthink able.3
1 Thus Knopf (Lehre, 38), who in particular would prefer to attach it to Did. 14.2: "If the case in 14.2 occurs, and those concerned cannot be reconciled with one another, the other members of the com munity should intervene and gently put them right."
Similarly at an earlier period Drews, "Apostellehre,"
280-81. For the explanation of the interpolation in 15.1-2 see above, p. 194 n. 4.
Not from a second redaction: see above.
For the quotation in Ps.-Cyprian De aleat. 4, see above, Introduction, §2b.
EAeyx^v occurs twice in the tractate: at Did. 2.7 and 4.3. The history of this theme's origin explains why it recurs more than once within the book.
This is the duty of the one who presides over the community in 1 Tim 5:20; 2 Tim 4:2; Titus 1:9, 13;
2:15. One should not see the contrast (here the cor tion, the association of the bishops and deacons with the function of correction is also expressed . . . by the transitional particle be. Concretely we are thus to picture the situation here also in such a way
. . . that the case requiring discipline has been dis cussed in the assembled community, but in the first instance the church leaders, as the authoritative representatives of the community, were the agents of judicial functions" (p. 96).
Eipr\vr) is here the equivalent of "peace, harmony."
See BAGD, s.v. Cf. 1 Clem. 63.2: eKKO^re rqv utiepcTOV tov ^r/Xovg upav bpyqv Kara rqv evrev- %lv, rjv erroLpoapeda nepi eipqvqq Kal opovolaq
("Root out the wicked passion of your jealousy according the entreaty for peace and concord which we have made in this letter"). Rordorf ("Remission des peches," 295 n. 3) refers among other passages to IQS 5.24-25: "each should reproach his fellow in truth, in meekness and in compassionate love for the man. No-one should speak to his brother in anger or muttering" (trans. of Florentino Garda
Martinez, The Dead Sea Scrolls Translated [2d ed.; Leiden: Brill; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996] 9). A more distant comparison is with T. Gad 6.3: k<xl eav apapr-q elq ae, elne aura ev elprjvq ("and if some one sins against you, speak to him in peace"). rectHo is the concern of all, while there it is the duty of the officeholders) as an alternative. Poschmann
(.Paenitentia secunda, 95-96) sees this correctly. On the Didache passage he comments, "Correction and punishment of the sinner appears, in principle, to be the duty of all the faithful. But it is apparent from the nature of the thing, and it is also not diffi cult to discern from the form of admonition itself, that ultimately this 'judging' will be done by one in authority among the brothers and sisters." "In addi
in such a case? Mpbeiq XocXeLru ppde Trap' vpuv aKOverco means "no one should speak with him or her, nor should he or she hear (anything) from you,"16 which is practically the equivalent of excommunica tion,17 although only until the moment of repentance tu €1)0:776Alta).7 This appears to mean a written gospel book,8 but it is not clear which one. The admonition here expressed, which the author finds in his gospel book, is reminiscent of Matt 5:229 or 18:15-17. But the question is whether he really had Matthew's Gospel at hand10 and not some other gospel unknown to us.11
(ecoq oil peravopop).
The next rule (Did. 15.3b) seems to apply to the cases of those who persist in sin despite brotherly or sisterly correction.12 Cf. the casuistry in Matt 18:15-17. Sin is described as an aoToxclv Kara tov erepov. Aarox^lv means "to miss the goal, to fall away."13 In this passage it
■ 4 The verse sounds like an epilogue. The author has just expressed his opinion on the topic of church disci pline and other questions touching Christian life now occur to him: eiixoti, eXeppoavvai Kai iraoca al irpd|eu; ("prayers, almsgiving, and all that you undertake").
For the Lord's Prayer, which is to be prayed three times a day, see above at Did. 8.2-3. It is possible that nothing is said about fasting because the author remembers what had already been said in 8.1.18 is used in a specific sense: doroxeIv Kara. tlvoc, must mean "to fall short, to sin against someone."14 Ilaq ocoToxuv Kara rod erepov15 thus refers to someone who errs by sinning against someone else. What must happen
7 Cf. Did. 8.2; 11.3.
8 Examples of this interpretation: the passage "seems to indicate the existence of a written gospel" (Kleist,
Didache, 165 n. 97); Vielhauer, Geschichte, 253-54: in Did. 8.2 the "gospel" means the gospel viva vox, but, in contrast, Did. 15.3 seems "to point to a written document" (p. 254). Did. 15.4 could refer to the viva vox, but 15.3 speaks against that. At the same time, even here (namely, in Did. 15.3-4, in comparison with 2 Clem. 8.5) the concept of "gospel" is "still understood in terms of content, not in a literary sense" (ibid.). Koester, Synoptische Uberlieferung,
Wengst, Didache, 25-26: the passage presupposes the Gospel of Matthew.
11 In addition one gets the impression that the author simply refers to the gospel but does not quote it.
According to Koester (Synoptische Uberlieferung 240) that is generally true of the Didache as a whole.
12 Drews, "Apostellehre," 282; Knopf, Lehre, 38.
13 In our literature it is otherwise applied to falling away from faith (and similar instances): 1 Tim 1:6;
6:21; 2 Tim 2:18; 2 Clem. 17.7. Cf. BAGD, s.v.
14 BAGD, s.v.; Lampe, s.v.: "hence err, i.e., act un justly."
15 Harris (Teaching, 9) emended to eraipov (cf. Did.
14.2). This was also considered by Audet (Didache, 483), but in the edition, at p. 240, he has erepov.
16 This phrase is a crux. Knopf (Lehre, 38) calls it a "tautology and a difficult construction." The shift in the subject causes difficulty; in p-qbeiq XaXeira, the community is the subject, while in pr/de . . . cocoveru, the subject seems to be the doroxuv(l).
Something like kocl ppdeiq aKovera avrov would be simpler. Or is this a corruption of the text, as Harnack (Lehre, 59) had already suggested? Pierre
Nautin ("Notes critiques sur la Didache," VC 13 [1959] 119-20) suggested an expansion: ppdeiq . . .
10-11: Did. 15.3 and 4 appear to refer already to a written gospel. For Koester's opinion on 8.2 and 11.3, see above, p. 51. For Did. 15.3-4, see also
Koester, 240. Rordorf and Tuilier (Doctrine, 88) sug gest for Did. 15.3-4 (and only for these verses) a ref erence to a written gospel, "and this note confirms once again that this chapter is probably a later addi tion." Cf. also 194 n. 4. For the whole question see above, Introduction, §7a. Is this a reference to an apocryphal gospel of the Q type? (Cf. Rordorf,
"Remission des peches," 293.) Audet (Didache, 182 and frequently elsewhere) suggested a gospel related to Matthew.
9 Matt 5:22 forbids wrath in general, however, and does not refer to fraternal or sororal correc tion.
10 Examples of this interpretation: Funk (Patres apostolici, 35) suggested an allusion to Matt 18:15-17; cf.
Drews, "Apostellehre," 282; Massaux (Influence, 3.167) considered that passage and possibly Matt
5:22 as well; Koester, Synoptische Uberlieferung, 210-11: only Matt 18:15 is possible, but a more stringent proof of knowledge of Matthew's Gospel cannot be produced; Rordorf and Tuilier, Doctrine,
194 n. 4: possibly comparable to Matt 18:15-20; ■nap vpuv dKOuera (irepi avrov). This may be correct.
17 This was denied by Harnack, Lehre, 60. Drews, "Apostellehre," 282: "[the sinner] is to be excluded both from the Lord's Supper and from contact with the community." Poschmann, Paenitentia secunda,
95: "It should be noted that all are obligated to refuse contact with the unrepentant sinner, even though he or she has only sinned against a single individual." For Poschmann's further suggestions regarding the subject of church discipline see above at n. 5.
15.3-4 Almsgiving is ultimately part of (Jewish-) Christian reli gious devotion; cf. above, at Did. 1.5-6. The phrase tco evocyyeXiu) tov nvpiov ppusv.™ It seems improbable that the Didachist was thinking specifically of Matthew 6 at this point.20
TrtiocxL ai Trpaijeig includes everything that could other wise be listed specifically as part of Christian behavior.
The Didachist does not intend to go into detail; he is content with a sweeping reference to "the gospel." The formula in v. 3 is repeated and expanded: ug exeTe
18 Massaux (Influence, 3.157 n. 32) differs: "The 'acts'
(7rpd|etg) may very possibly represent the third ele ment of good works, namely fasting."
19 See above at v. 3.
20 Massaux, Influence, 3.157; also Wengst, Didache, 26.
X .