"Amino ray ccepricsiv x0) corpeorrizdiy emibuuiav. Here there may be dependence on 1 P 211; but more probably capzzxav is an interpolation from 1 P 211, to explain the less biblical caperizdv, which the Apost. Const. changes into xoruizay. Of. 4 Mac 182 Tay 38 éxiPomsay ok wey elow sburizoed, cei DE cayerize:. The present writer cannot think (with Ropes, Die Spriiche Jesu, 40) that this maxim is to be viewed ‘as an abstract reproduction of such passages as Mt 527M’. It goes too closely with what; follows. The best parallel is Hermas, Mand. xii., where all virtues are referred to 4 éxifuule % dered (6 yeep pdGos rod Oot xceroixer by TH eribuule +H dyeby, 2, 4), and all vices to 4 exiDupelee sovnpoe CAréxerbos ody dei cero réiv ExiOvpesciv réiy TOVUPAY, byce crorxbtevos Shouse 7d OG, 2, 2). Of. Mand. viii., with’ its maxim, 4
* Dr. Taylor’s paper in the Journal of Philology, xviii. 297 ff., almost amounts to demonstration on both issues.
+ Cf. John Climacus (see. vi.) edceBav iy 5d cirodverr Sidévecs, evoreBéorepoy 53 x00} TH fy aitodves’ co Ot aad rod aipotyros pei; areesreiv, Svvecieivous pcAirroe, Thy Tay crocbdiy zed wovwy idi0y zelbiornzev. This passage suggests that ¢ has fallen out from the phrase oid! yap divecoes at the end of i. 4, ‘Nay, not even
if thou art able’ would make good sense after ‘Ask not back’ thine own,
DIDACHE
DIDACHE
447
, fs : - : eyxpireie Diary eoriv' esi Tivaly yup del eyxpurebecbos, tai rivwy ig ; sen x ae od Del. . « byxparevocs by aad rovnpias maans, Epyutoueves TO Pik 5 es Mkse a &yebov: so 2 Clem. xvi. 3, wa ayrimaperanceel ro Tay ZOTMInaY exifuusay.
No doubt this has reference to what follows, —repression of the instincts to ‘hit back’ and to hold fast one’s possessions. For such instincts spring largely from bodily impulse, while unresent- fulness (dveéccaxta, cf. Justin, Apol. i. 16) is a victory of spirit over body, a supreme form of self-control (cwppoctvn or éyxpdrea). Yet, admit- ting this connexion, would the ‘Teaching’ or exposition of the fundamental commands in Did. i. 2 be likely to begin with unresentfulness, rather than with what we find in i. 3, as also in Lk 67"? It is hard to decide. The very fact that i. 2 does precede might make the compiler pass at once to the most concrete and practical examples of the spirit of love, viz. unresentfulness and active charity, rather than dwell further on the feeling of love * and its secret actsof prayer and fasting. Again, it is rather strange that in i. 3 (and there alone) the plural ‘Bless ye,’ etc., appears at the head of precepts purporting to be addressed to the indi- vidual catechumen. For it is not as though at this time the ipsissima verba of the Lord’s precepts were felt to be too sacred to be adapted to the context in which they were cited. Yet such argu- ments seem weaker than those pointing toi. 3 as originally part of our Didache. For, first, our Didache really has in mind not the single convert, but Christians in general, as comes out in its ‘ May ye, children, be delivered from all these’ (at the end of the Evil Way). Next, the clauses, ‘fast for those who persecute you,’ ‘and ye shall not have an enemy,’ are not found in our ospels; and the latter at least seems to have influenced Justin Martyr both in his Dialogue and Apology. Indeed, Justin practically follows i. 3 as a whole, where it deviates from our Gospels.
Apol. i. 15, eiyebe datp ray Ey Opiiy tua nol wyarers rods puooivens des nal ebroyeire cos noropupeévors viv zat evxerbe mip tay exnpeaovray vines. The sentiment xa) ody kere ex bpov is traced in Apol. i. 14, Dial. 254 B, as also in Clem. Hom. xii. 32, by Dr. C. Taylor (Expositor, 3rd series, vi. 364f., where Justin’s relation to the Did. is examined). To which may be added Apol. of Aristides, 15, cous adinovvTas adToUS ruapunnhovas Zul Tporgineis avrors Eavrois zowvow. Nor does it seem mere accident that Mand. ii., which begins Hermas’ exposition of the faith and fear of God, in enjoining childlike arrorns and dxuxia first specifies abstinence from worononicn (7004 evOnviay aévrore ees pera wévrav), and then deals with the duty of giving (&7Ads).
To sum up. The fuller Didache seems, from the first, to have contained all, or very nearly all,t of ch. i. as it stands in our MS. Its title was the second and longer one of our MS, under which it was perhaps known to Hermas, whose Twelve Mandates (€vro\al), artificially drawn out to that number, seem suggested by those of the Twelve Apostles. Again, they and their teaching ‘to the Gentiles’ may be alluded to in the Twelve nations { who inhabit the world, and to whom
* Like Test. Issachar, 5, eyerure xiprov woh voy TmTIOV, rivnte xu) chery treeve (the practical result of &xaérys to God and man). j G dibaorye the similar Evangelical matter in ch. xvi., which is generally admitted to have been part of the fuller Didache from the first. Yet while we find early traces of ‘Idpurerm, etc. , e.g. in Hermas (see above, p. 446b), it is otherwise with the nenalty of the deceitful receiver; moreover, the connexion Between "Dpwréra, etc. and what precedes would gain by its omission. But if an interpolation, it must be early, as it is not assimilated to our Gospels. : a)