The Sacraments of the Didache
Chapter Seven The Sacraments of the Didache As we move from the presentation of the "Two Ways" (1-5) to the section of the Didache that deals with subjects related to the life of the believer within the church (6-16), I remind my reader that we move into a section that has clear jiterary markers for both its beginning and ending. Furthermore, within this section are clear indications as to how it 15 structured by its author to present its material as a unified discourse.
First, there is an inclusio of sorts in the repetition of the statement that believers can be "perfect" in 6:2 and 16:2. Unless this is just a coincidence, the repetition indicates that bearing "the yoke of the Lord" in 6:2 is related to the charge in 16:2 to gather together frequently and find what is "appropriate for your souls." This correlation is important to note when we attempt a brief explanation for the perplexing transition of chapter six which seems to intrude between the two main sections of the Didache. Second, we note again the intention of the discourse marker περι δε at 6:3; 7:1; 9:1 and 11:3. Each time the marker introduces a new subject that the Didachist will discuss (food, baptism, eucharist, and apostle/prophets). Earlier we mentioned how this phrase can be seen in the Pauline correspondence when he addresses subjects in 1 Corinthians and 1
Thessalonians that have been raised by those congregations.
Over the next couple of chapters we will examine what the Didachist has to say about those four subjects under the chapter titles, "The Sacraments of the Didache" and "The Ministers of the Didache." I am only too aware that many authors have written much about these chapters and that I can only survey their ideas and offer my own perspective on them. Hopefully, these next two chapters may also prove most helpful for those who look to this early Christian document for some guidance about "doing church" today.
The Path, the Yoke, and Food (6:1-3) It is necessary to comment on this "transitional" section before we look at the practical matters of baptism and the eucharist.
The Didachist's comment and warning in 6:1 provides a conclusion to the "Two Ways" material that pre-
The Sacraments of the Didache cedes it. "See to it that no one leads you astray from this way of teaching (δὲ δαχῆς), since he is teaching you apart from God." Thus the "Two Ways" section concludes with its own inclusio, since it opens with a reference to the "teaching" in 1:1.
Many writers have noticed that the words of 6:2 seem to be abruptly introduced along with the first occurrence of the περι δὲ in 6:3.
6:2 For, on the one hand, if you are able to bear the whole yoke of the Lord, you will be perfect; but if, on the other hand, you are not able, that which you are able, do this.
6:3 And concerning (peri de.) food, [1] bear that which you are able, [2] but from the food sacrificed to idols, especially keep away for it is [related to] the worship of dead gods.
A number of recent studies have stressed the point that the passage beginning with 6:2 is neither in the Latin Doctrina Apostolorum nor in the parallel section in Barnabas. They feel that this is because the Greek "Two Ways" source used by the Didachist ended at 6:1.°* These writers have also explained the attitude of this passage in strong counterpoint with Paul and also with the even more conservative "Jewish" position of James. One scholar even speaks of "Paul's Jewish Christian Opponents in the Didache.""? We cannot here interact with the details of these views. Only one point will be made and an alternative view offered.
It is assumed by most writers that the necessary-to-be-borne "yoke of the Lord" in 6:2 refers to the "yoke of the Torah." This interpretation is usually set against or compared with the "Jerusalem Decree" in Acts 15. Cetainly there are some important verbal parallels with the statement by Peter in Acts 15:10,
"Now, therefore, why are you putting God to the test by placing a yoke (ζυγὸν) on the neck of the disciples that neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear (Baotaoat)?" Peter refers to the yoke of Torah. There are two other uses of the word "yoke" in the NT which should also be considered. The first is the strong statement by Paul in Gal. 6:1, "For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke (ζυγῷ) of slavery."
Paul is obviously referring again to the yoke of Torah. The other use of the word is by Jesus in Matt. 11:29, 30, "Take my yoke (ζυγόν) upon you, and learn from me, for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke (ζυγός) is easy, and my burden is light."
The suggestion here is that the yoke is not that of the Jewish Torah but, as the verse states, it is the yoke of "the Lord." Since the "Lord" elsewhere in Di-
The Sacraments of the Didache 71] dache refers to Jesus (see "Gospel of our Lord" in 15:4), it seems to be forced to make this a reference to the Torah, as it is in Acts and Galatians. Furthermore, the Didachist had used phrase "you will be perfect" (ἔσῃ τέλειος) at the beginning of his "evangelical" section in 1:4. Thus, he recalls once again the commands of the Lord that he quoted in 1:3b-2:1. They are for him "the yoke of the Lord" and so make up the new Torah of Jesus. Yes, he recognizes the serious nature of the Lord's commandments, and those who are not able to obey all these commands fully should at least do what they can. Didache scholars who have contributed significant commentaries on the book also have acknowleged this view as the preferred one.** When this view of the "yoke" is recognized, it frees the interpreter from having to align this statement with those of James,
Peter and Paul and then posit the degree of agreement or disagreement with them. While such a discussion is valid, caution should be used in employing 6:2 as a strong peiece of evidence in that discussion.
In 6:3 the Didachist introduces his next subject, food, and offers some very succinct teaching. The young believers should "bear that which you are able, but from the food sacrificed to idols, especially keep away for it is [related to] the worship of dead gods." While all the obligations of the Torah are not required, there is concern about the food laws, even though the commands of the Torah that relate exclusively to the Jewish people are not expected to be obeyed. The Didachist's advice is nuanced and also reveals a pastoral sensitivity. The eating of meat sacrificed to idols, on the other hand, is absolutely forbidden. As for the other food laws, individuals may observe them to the extent possible for each one. Converts from Gentile backgrounds may find some of the dietary laws extremely difficult to obey. On the other hand, concern for Jewish sensitivities in this regard should motivate a total abstinence from idolatry—something in their pagan background that simply can't be countenanced in their new lives. While
Paul may have nuanced this further to keep from binding the conscience, their advice, in my opinion, is still moving in the same trajectory.
Baptism (7:1-4) Sad to say, most laymen and many ministers show little knowledge of the Didache.
If there is one thing that they do know about this book, it is that "it teaches that you can baptize any way that you want." On the one hand, Baptists like its emphasis on immersion, but do not like its permission of pouring if you lack adequate water. On the other hand, Presbyterians like its flexibility about the mode of baptism, but do not like its preference for immersion. And neither
Baptists nor Presbyterians are too excited about that preference for cold and flowing water! Hopefully, there is some way to approach chapter seven without this baggage of denominational agendas getting in the way!
For the sake of comparison, I quote the entire chapter with my translation.
7:1 And concerning baptism, baptize this way:
After you have said all these things beforehand, immerse in the name of the Father
Ἴ2 The Sacraments of the Didache and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit in flowing water.
7:2 [1] but if you (sg.) do not have flowing water, immerse in other water; [2] and if you are not able to do so in cold,
[immerse] in warm [water]; 7:3 [3] and if you should not have either, pour out water onto the head three times in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.
7:4 And prior to the baptism, [1] let the one baptizing fast; [2] also one being baptized [3] and if any others are able to do so;
And order the one being baptized to fast one or two [days] before.
Willy Rordorf has briefly summarized the main historical issues related to the chapter in an excellent article." His conclusions are succinctly stated and avoid the denominational agendas mentioned above.
The text is striking less for what it says than for what it does not say. One can clearly observe that this short text does not transmit the entire formula of the baptismal rite. But only those aspects of baptism which one could not assurdly pass over in silence, if one had known them. Let us try to summarize them. a) The renunciation of Satan is not mentioned. Moreover, one has the impression that this rite would have been included in the kind of work which sanctions the teaching of the "two ways" in Didache 1-6. b) The consecration of the water seems to be unknown in the Didache. c) There is no trace of the Pauline theology of baptism. d) What is most striking is the absence of the laying on of hands and of any mention of the gift of the Holy Spirit at the moment of baptism. G.W.H. Lampe has shown that ths old tradition was more widespread at the beginning of Christianity than one would think at first sight. The Didache must be linked to that strem of the tradition, which is a sign of its archaic character."
Since baptism is a subject that is so interwined with theology and history, the approach of a theologically informed church historian is helpful. Philip
Schaff, an eminent church historian, was one of the earliest scholars in the English speaking world who thoroughly investigated the Didache after its publication. I will offer a summary of the baptismal chapter along the lines that he developed in the second edition of his thorough study of the Didache."' His ideas will be supplemented with my own personal comments at particular points
The Sacraments of the Didache
where appropriate. Schaff infers the following particulars about baptism as practiced by the community of the Didache.
1. Baptism was to take place after a period of instruction in the Way of Life and the Way of Death. Nothing is said about infant baptism. The references to instruction and fasting indicate that the Didachist has in view only the baptism of catechumens, or adult believers. In the apostolic church and in the ante-Nicene age baptism of believing converts was the rule. In the New Testament the baptized are addressed as people who have doed and risen with Christ.
Thus, in the NT baptism and conversion are almost used as synonymous terms (Acts 2:38, 41; Rom. 6:3, 4; Gal. 3:27). In an instructive lecture presented at the Oxford Apostolic Fathers conference in April, 2004, Professor David Wright asked if the Apostolic Fathers broke the silence of the New Testament about infant baptism. He concluded that they did not."* At the end of the second century, Tertullian mentions the practice, although he opposed it as imprudent.
Within fifty years, however, Origen wrote approvingly of the practice (To Romans, 50, 5, 6). As a church historian and Presbyterian, Schaff did not think that such silence in the apostolic period argues against the practice. Inclusion of children in the rite was necessitated when Christianity became established and family religion with its duties and privileges thus emerged.
2. Baptism must be administered into the triune name (εἰς τὸ ὄνομα) of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit. This is the form prescribed by Jesus in Matt. 28:19, 20. The shorter form "into the name of Jesus" is not mentioned, but in 9:5 the requirement for partaking of the eucharist is that one must be "baptized into the name of the Lord" (εἰς ὄνομα κυρίου). This variation and freedom of expression is characteristic of NT usage as well (see the name of Jesus in Acts 8:16; 10:48; 19:5; Rom. 6:3; Gal. 3:27), and should not be viewed as evidence of different authors or redactors. The use of the singular "name" before the three persons is indicative of a Trinitarian viewpoint — before the word "trinity" was coined in the late second century.
3. The normal and most favored mode of baptism is three-fold immersion in "living water," i.e., fresh, running water in either a stream or lake, as distinct from standing water in a pool or cistern. Immersion must be intended by the imperative verb βαπτισατε, otherwise there would be no difference between the first mode and the last which is clearly pouring (ἔκχεον). The preference for a river not only derives from the Savior's baptism in the Jordan, but also was consistent with the Jewish mikveh practice of always being done in "living water."""
4. While preference is given to immersion in living water, the Didache allows three exceptions: (a) Baptism by immersion "into other water" (εἰς ἄλλο ὕδωρ), i.e. any other kind of cold water in pools or cisterns. (Ὁ) Baptism by immersion in warm water (in houses), when the health of the candidate or the inclemency of the climate or season may require it. (c) Threefold aspersion of the head, where neither running nor standing, nor cold nor warm water is at hand in sufficient quantity for total immersion.
The aspersion of the head was the nearest substitute for total immersion, since the head is the chief
The Sacraments of the Didache part of man. There can be no baptism without baptizing the head; but there may be valid baptism without baptizing the rest of the body.
Here we have the oldest extant testimony for the validity of baptism by pouring or aspersion. The reason given is not the health of the one baptized
(clinical baptism). The Didache puts it simply on the ground of scarcity of water, so that healthy persons might likewise be baptized (e.g. if converted in a desert, or on a mountain, or in a prison, or in a catacomb.) We have, therefore, a right to infer that at the end of the first century there was no rigid uniformity in regard to the mode of baptism and no scruple about the validity of the aspersion or pouring, provided only the head was baptized into the triune name with the intention of baptizing.
Thus explained, the directions of the Didaslic are perfectly clear and consistent with all the other information we have on baptism in the ante-Nicene age.
Trine immersion into the triune name was the rule, as it is to this day in all the Oriental churches. Triune aspersion or pouring was the exception.
The new thing which we learn is this: that in the post-Apostolic age a degree of freedom prevailed on the mode of baptism, which was afterwards somewhat restricted.
Schaff concludes, "From this fact we may reason, (a fortiori) that the same freedom existed already in the apostolic age. It cannot be supposed that the Twelve
Apostles were less liberal than the writer of the Didache, who wrote as it were in their name."!"° It is astonishing how this ancient testimony has been twisted and turned by certain writers in their own party interest.
Some exclusive immersionists, in order to get rid of the exception, have even declared the Didache a literary forgery, or subject to later editing by compromising proto-Presbyterians. Some zealous advocates of sprinkling as the supposed original and Scriptural mode have turned the exception into the rule, and substituted an imaginary difference between pouring in running water and pouring on dry ground for the real difference between immersion and pouring water on the head.
5. Baptism is to be preceded by fasting on the part of both the catechumen and the baptizer and some others who may join. The former is required to fast one or two days. There is no such prescription in the New Testament. In the case of Christ fasting followed his Baptism (Matt 4:2). The three thousand
Pentecostal converts seem to have been baptized on the day of their conversion (Acts 2:38-40). Fasting is likewise mentioned as customary in connection with Baptism by Justin Martyr and Tertullian, but not so definitely as the Didache.
The fasting of the baptizer probably soon went out of use.
6. Baptism is not represented as a clerical function, but the directions are addressed to all members of the congregation.
In the corresponding direction of the Apostolic Constitutions the bishop or presbyter is addressed, and Ignatius restricts the right to baptize to the bishop, or at all events requires his permission or presence.
Justin Martyr mentions no particular person as the approved officiant. Tertullian, in his Montanist opposition to a special priesthood, expressly gives the right even to laymen, when bishops, priests, or deacons are not at hand.'®
The Sacraments of the Didache
7. No mention is made of exorcism, which preceded the act of Baptism, nor of the application of oil, salt, or other material, which accompanied it as early as the second and third centuries.
The silence is conclusive, not indeed against the use of these additions, but against their importance in the estimation of the writer and his age. As has been observed so often in these matters, this is another indication of the early date of the Didache.
Fasting and Prayer (8:1-3) The mention of fasting accompanying baptism leads the Didachist into a brief discussion of fasting and how it is not to be done like the "hypocrites"
(8:1). Although other views have been maintained about the identity of these "hypocrites," it still seems best to see the influence of the Matthean "Gospel of the Lord" and interpret them as Pharisaic Jews who were in the area of the Didache community.'? The verbal similarities to canonical Matthew 6 (fasting, prayer, Lord's Prayer, hypocrites) in 7:5-8:2 are quite striking, although the two works discuss the subjects in a different order and context. We discussed the textual features of the Didache's "Lord's Prayer" in chapter six.
The Eucharist (9:1-10:7; 14:1-3) The third appearance of the marker περὶ δὲ in 9:1 introduces the subject of the "eucharist" (εὐχαριστία) or "thanksgiving meal." This discussion continues through chapter ten and is picked up again, although in a different way, in chapter fourteen. Johannes Betz has succinctly summarized the challenge facing the interpreter of these chapters.
The famous Meal Prayers of chapters 9 and 10 are also among the most difficult and contested problems of Didache research. Their main content consists of prayers which are certainly older than the writing as a whole. That they already originated early and derive from the pre-Didache Aramaic community is indicated by their formal and material proximity to Jewish formulae (Berakot), from the Aramaic cries of Hosanna and Maranatha, from the baptism into the Lord (Jesus) attested here, from the ancient Pais-Christology, as generally form their Jewish-Christian theology. The whole stands under the title "eucharist." In any case, what exactly is meant by this is, to this day, a contested question and a problem which continues to be posed.'
As is often the case, Willy Rordorf has handled the challenge of this material ably and offers an excellent synthesis of the three chapters.'**
I acknowledge his influence on my own approach to these chapters.
These chapters represent a transitional link between the Jewish tradition represented in the table blessings (the Birkat Hamazon) and the eucharistic liturgies preserved in the later formularies for the Christian Mass. In these primitive liturgies we very much observe prayers in their Jewish cradle." The Jewish prayers, however, are Christianized in their adaptation for the Didache congregations. We set out an analytical translation of the chapters.
The Sacraments of the Didache 10:1
And after being filled, give thanks in this way:
10:2
We give you thanks, holy Father, For your holy name, Which you have caused to dwell in our hearts,
And for the knowledge and faith and immortality Which you revealed to us through your servant Jesus.
To you is the glory forever.
10:3
You, almighty Master, Created all things for the sake of your name, Both food and drink you have given to people for enjoyment in order that they might give thanks.
But to us you have graciously bestowed spiritual food and drink and eternal life through your servant.
10: 6 —_ Before all things, we give you thanks because you are powerful.
To you is the glory forever.
10:5
Remember, Lord, your church, to save her from every evil, and to perfect her in your love and to gather her together from the four winds, the saints into your kingdom which you have prepared for her.
Because yours is the power and the glory forever.
10:6
[A] May grace come and may this world pass away!
[B] Hosanna to the God of David! (cf. Matt. 21:9) [C] If anyone is holy, let him come!
If anyone is not, let him repent!
[D] Come Lord [maranatha]! Amen!
10:7
— But allow the prophets to "give thanks" as much as they wish.
The main question facing the interpreter is why there are two separate sections describing the "eucharist." I consider the approach that considers such
"repetition" as evidence of a later clumsy redactor as being too facile, and I rather accept the integrity of the Bryennios manuscript as it is. But why are there two treatments? I accept the proposal that chapters nine and ten contain, not a eucharistic liturgy in the strict sense, but prayers spoken at table before the eucharist proper. Furthermore, the "text contains prayers originally used at table during communal meals, and that these prayers were given eucharistic overtones because the eucharist followed immediately on the communal meal."'"
In his massive commentary, Jean Audet provides abundant evidence of how influential was the ancient Jewish tradition of thanking God.'' In this view, held in varying ways by many authors, chapters nine and ten describe an agape, or ordinary breaking of bread. The prayers are blessings said at that meal, as 10:1
The Sacraments of the Didache
makes clear, "And after being filled, give thanks in this way." They form what one has called "ἃ Christian Birkat Hamazon in a Passover setting."'°® This meal was then followed by the eucharist, which 10:6 introduces by offering the invitation, "If anyone is holy, let him come! If anyone is not, let him repent!" The reason for the divergence into a discussion of prophets and apostles (11-13) is due to the statement to allow the prophets to "eucharistize" as much as they wish
(10:7). The divergence also thus separates the agape from the "main eucharist" in space as well as time.
In the Jewish table blessings, there was a thanksgiving for bread and wine and after the meal there was a lengthy prayer of blessing at whch foreigners, women, slaves, and children were not present. In the Didache prayers, this would correspond to the restriction on non-baptized persons partaking of the meal (9:5). Rordorf further cites the evidence of Hippolytus' Apostolic Traditon, which prohibits catechumens from partaking in the agape.'"
There is similarity and there is, of course, difference between the Didache's form of the prayers and the traditional Jewish form. Christians took the Jewish blessings over the bread and wine and gave them a new meaning. The wine recalls the vine of David, the hidden meaning which has been revealed in the passion of the Messiah, the Isaianic suffering servant (παῖς). The bread is the bread that was broken—a sign of salvation and a pledge of life for all believers who eat of it. The implications of this naic-Christology are obscured by versions which translate this key word as "child."''® The implications of this word for explaining the evident lack of sacrificial language in these prayers will be explored in a later chapter on the theology of the Didache.
Chapter 14 then states the following:
14:1 And on the Lord's day of the Lord, when you are gathered together, break bread.
[A] And give thanks, having before confessed your failings, so that your sacrifice may be pure.
14:2
[Bj However, let no one having a conflict with his comrade, come together with you until they have been reconciled, in order that your sacrifice may not be defiled.
14:3
For this [sacrifice] is that which was spoken by the Lord:
"In every place and time, offer to me a pure sacrifice."
"Because I am a great king," says the Lord, "and my name will be wondrous among the Gentiles."
This chapter adds the following details not mentioned in chapters 9 and 10.
1. The meeting takes place on "Lord's day of the Lord" (κατὰ κυριακὴν δὲ κυρίου). Despite this overly full expression, the reference is doubtless to a Sunday, being the new day for specifically Christian worship. It should be noted that in a book which is so Jewish in its expression and context, worship on the first day of the week and not the seventh is strongly emphasized. By the time of Igna-
The Sacraments of the Didache tius and "Barnabas" the practice of Sunday worship is very obvious, although some may affirm that this was a predominantly Gentile church (Magnesians 9:
1, 2; Barnabas 15). But ina first century Jewish-Christian work, the lack of continued Sabbath observance may come as a surprise to some modern Messianic
Jews who desire to maintain that practice. Didache 8:1 attacks "hypocrites" who fast on days two and five while urging believers to fast on days four and six.
Rordorf asks, "May we suppose that in emphasizing the fact that the meeting is on Sunday, Didache 14, 1 is making a similar point against those who would
_ make Saturday the preferred day of worship? We cannot say so with certainty, but the possibility is not to be excluded since other texts from the same period show that such a 'temptation' existed."''' In addition to the Magnesians reference above, he refers to Gal. 4:8-11 and Col. 2:16, 17 as evidence for this temptation to continue Sabbath observance among Jewish and Gentile Christians.
2. If the Sunday meeting is the same as the one described in 9 and 10, it must also have included a communal meal. It follows that the meal was taken in the evening, since that would be when a meal is taken and work obligations would have prevented something as important as this in the daytime. Rordorf cites the famous Letter of Pliny the Younger where he mentions a meal of the Christians on Sunday evening.''" I am not convinced that Sunday evening was the practice of the Didache believers, since in Jewish custom the evening marks the beginning of the next day and such a meal on the first day of the week (Acts
20:7) would be satisfied by one on Saturday evening. In any case, these chapters belong to a period when the agape and the eucharist had not yet been separated.
3. We see that the breaking of bread and thanksgiving (eucharist) were accompanied by a confession of sins. This same command was already given in 4:14. As we compare the two passages, it appears that 14:1 is a sort of elaborated commentary on the earlier passage. The confession here is also communal
(note the plural εὐχαριστήσατε and προσεξομολογησάμενοι) while the confession in 4:14 is individual (the singular ἐξομολογήση). The individual catechumen is taught to confess his sins, but he joins with the community later as he confesses at the eucharist. Furthermore, 14:2 states that those sins can include an unreconciled dispute between spiritual "comrades." This should remind the reader of Matt. 5:23, 24, which refers to the Temple offering when Jesus uttered them. His words, however, were adapted to the new situation of Christian worship.
4. Rordorf states that he "would not attach much importance to the use of the word "sacrifice."''* I agree. It is simply wrong to read the practice of later
Christian sacramental practices into this early Jewish context. Clearly these texts, in appealing to Mal. 1:11, 14, are contrasting this new type of sacrifice with the bloody sacrifices of the Old Covenant. As was mentioned in a previous chapter, this approach would be in agreement with the NT texts which speak of the Christian sacrifices being spiritual and consisting of praise and thanksgiving.
To utilize them as being some sort of preliminary teaching about the sacrifice of the mass is grossly anachronistic.
Finally, like its description in the NT, the eucharist of the Didache has an eschatological focus as well. Consider the emphasis of 9:4, "Just as this broken
The Sacraments of the Didache
bread was scattered over the mountains, and was gathered together and became one, in this way, may your church be gathered together from the ends of the earth into your kingdom." A local community, gathered around what is but a small fragment, recognizes that it is part of a larger loaf, or body to change the metaphor, that will be gathered into the future kingdom.
ὴ ἔτι -~ ἜΜΕΝ ΓΈ Pa hte Lint 'ret ΞΕ ahi νος, Ἐν ΠΥ ΜῈ i : γα ϑυ χα | On ary ghost hated np pit ἐῶν. ὭΣ Στ ΠΝ nivel em vr
Re ἢ os μάν see Rd ἘῸΝ καὶ ὭΣ ἢ ςα ay Tee aS Sig Pr! been ux wet εὐ — i ὩΣ ee >. ane aS ee met fy AN GS PE