DIDASCALIA

DIDASCALIA. - This apocryphal writing purports to be the “Catholic doctrine” of the Twelve Apostles and claims to have been written in Jerusalem after the “decree” of the Apostles (Acts 15:23 ff.). Like the decree, the Didascalia of the Twelve Apostles aims to prevent the infiltration of customs judged incompatible with the Church of the Gentiles. For this reason, the theoretical center of the book is a discussion of the value of the Jewish law. The author distinguishes between the Decalogue and the ceremonial law. The latter was given after the sin of the golden calf (Ex. 32:4) and is called δευτέρωσις, “secundatio,” that is, mishnah in the sense of Jewish tradition. The former law is a “yoke” (a yoke that is easy: Matt. 11:30), the latter a “bond.” Christ came to abolish the second law: “secundationem destruxit” (p. 227, 11th ed., ed. R. H. Connolly). One of the bishop’s principal tasks is to distinguish the second legislation from the first (p. 34). Sacrifices were not demanded by God, which explains why Abel was killed during a sacrifice and why Noah did not receive praise from God when he sacrificed after the flood (citation from an apocryphon: V. p. 221, 7 ff.). Instead of sacrifices, God desired “orationes et precationes et gratiarum actiones” (p. 87, 10). This evaluation of the law does not come, as has been said, from Justin and Irenaeus but has much in common with the ideas of Jewish-Christians and the literature of the Pseudo-Clementines (cf. C. Schmidt, Studien zu den Pseudo-Clementinen [Texte und Untersuchungen, 46, 1], Leipzig 1929, p. 263). The author of the Didascalia, writing for Gentile Christians (citation from the Sibyl, p. 173), knew the apocryphal Acts of the Apostles (Peter, Paul, perhaps also Thomas), the Gospel of Peter (v. L. Vaganay, L'Evangile de Pierre, Paris 1930, pp. 167 ff., 184 ff), and that of the Hebrews (L. Vaganay, op. cit., p. 186; R. H. Connolly, part 1, p. xxvii ff.), as well as the Prayer of Manasseh. The literature of the Pseudo-Clementines is not cited, but Jewish traditions reached the author (p. 100, 15 ff.: Jewish interpretation of Deut. 6:5; V. H. L. Strack-P. Billerbeck, Kommentar zum Neuen Testament aus Talmud und Midrasch, I, Munich 1922, pp. 100, 110, 4; the pagans and the left side of God: V. Apocalypse of Abraham, p. 36, 16, Bonwetsch), perhaps through Jewish-Christian traditions. Coincidences with the Didache, Barnabas, and Hermas can be explained even without the hypothesis of literary dependence, but the letters of St. Ignatius were certainly known to the author of the Didascalia, and with Ignatius he shares the emphasis placed on the episcopate and its activity (distribution of offerings). There is little information on liturgical service, but noteworthy are details on fasting (strange chronology of Holy Week), widows, martyrs, and the order within the church during religious service (orientation of prayer). The original work, preserved in Syriac translations and partly in Latin (Verona manuscript), was written in Greek (a small fragment published by V. Bartlet, The Didachē reconsidered, in Journal of Theological Studies, 13 [1917], pp. 303 ff.). The Greek version in the Apostolic Constitutions is a reworking. The work was probably written in Syria in the first half of the 3rd century. From Epiphanius, Haer. 70:10, we know that the Didascalia was read among the Audiani. It seems that Aphrahat (v. R. H. Connolly, op. cit. in bibliography) knew it; the same applies to Epiphanius (v. K. Holl, op. cit., pp. 209 ff). Among Eastern Christians, the Didascalia is often included among canonical writings.