The Didache (DOCTRINE OF THE TWELVE APOSTLES) What do Protestants think about this? The Didache or the "instructions to the twelve (apostles)" It is f

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jimmy_B
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

Jimmy_B

Guest
The Didache (DOCTRINE OF THE TWELVE APOSTLES)
What do Protestants think about this? The Didache or the “instructions to the twelve (apostles)” It is from the first century and it supports Catholicism.
 
Jimmy_B said:
The Didache (DOCTRINE OF THE TWELVE APOSTLES)
What do Protestants think about this? The Didache or the “instructions to the twelve (apostles)” It is from the first century and it supports Catholicism.
Click to expand...
It supports Catholicism?
No way.
Did you see the part about baptism? Nothing about infants.
Did you see the part where each congregation gets to pick their own bishops (because the local church was the highest level of office)?
Did you see the part where the prayer at the Lords supper says nothing about it becoming the actual blood and body?

Did you see the part where even the Apostles(so much for apostolic succession myths) have to be tested by local congregations?

Did you see the one where the Catholic encyclopedia confirms everything I just said …
now you have…
There are other signs of early date: the simplicity of the baptismal rite, which is apparently neither preceded by exorcisms nor by formal admission to the catechumenate; the simplicity of the Eucharist, in comparison with the elaborate quasi-Eucharistic prayer in Clem., I Cor., lix-lxi; the permission to prophets to extemporize their Eucharistic thanksgiving; the immediate expectation of the second advent. As we find the Christian Sunday already substituted for the Jewish Sabbath as the day of assembly in Acts, xx, 7 and I Cor., xvi, 2, and called the Lord’s day (Revelation 1:10), there is no difficulty in supposing that the parallel and consequent shifting of the fasts to Wednesday and Friday may have taken place at an equally early date, at least in some places. But the chief point is the ministry. It is twofold: (1) local and (2) itinerant. — (1) The local ministers are bishops and deacons, as in St. Paul (Phil., i, 1) and St. Clement. Presbyters are not mentioned, and the bishops are clearly presbyter-bishops, as in Acts, xx, and in the Pastoral Epistles of St. Paul. But when St. Ignatius wrote in 107, or at the latest 117, the three orders of bishops, priests, and deacons were already considered necessary to the very name of a Church, in Syria, Asia Minor, and Rome. If it is probable that in St. Clement’s time there was as yet no “monarchical” bishop at Corinth, yet such a state of things cannot have lasted long in any important Church. On this ground therefore the Didache must be set either in the first century or else in some backwater of church life. The itinerant ministry is obviously yet more archaic. In the second century prophecy was a charisma only and not a ministry, except among the Montanists. — (2) The itinerant ministers are not mentioned by Clement or Ignatius. The three orders are apostles, prophets, and teachers, as in I Cor., xii, 28 sq.: “God hath set some in the Church; first apostles, secondly prophets, thirdly doctors [teachers]; after that miracles, then the graces of healings, helps, governments, kinds of tongues, interpretations of speeches. Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all doctors?” The Didache places teachers below apostles and prophets, the two orders which St. Paul makes the foundation of the Church (Ephesians 2:20). The term apostle is applied by St. Paul not only to the Twelve, but also to himself, to Barnabas, to his kinsmen, Andronicus and Junias, who had been converted before him, and to a class of preachers of the first rank. But apostles must have “seen the Lord” and have received a special call. There is no instance in Holy Scripture or in early literature of the existence of an order called apostles later than the Apostolic age.
Click to expand...
 
I love that 70 AD thing…they have no clue if it is 50 AD or 80 AD or what…seriously folks…
 
Hi

Jesus instructed to the Apostles:

Matthew 10
2 And the names of the twelve apostles are these: The first, Simon who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother, 3 James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother, Philip and Bartholomew, Thomas and Matthew the publican, and James the son of Alpheus, and Thaddeus, 4 Simon the Cananean, and Judas Iscariot, who also betrayed him. 5 These twelve Jesus sent: commanding them, saying: Go ye not into the way of the Gentiles, and into the city of the Samaritans enter ye not. 6 But go ye rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

But Paul deviated from the instructions Jesus gave to the Apostles, to the dislike of them:

Acts Of Apostles 18:
5 And when Silas and Timothy were come from Macedonia, Paul was earnest in preaching, testifying to the Jews, that Jesus is the Christ.6 But they gainsaying and blaspheming, he shook his garments, and said to them: Your blood be upon your own heads; I am clean: from henceforth I will go unto the Gentiles. 7 And departing thence, he entered into the house of a certain man, named Titus Justus, one that worshipped God, whose house was adjoining to the synagogue.

Acts Of Apostles 11:
1 And the apostles and brethren, who were in Judea, heard that the Gentiles also had received the word of God. 2 And when Peter was come up to Jerusalem, they that were of the circumcision contended with him, 3 Saying: Why didst thou go in to men uncircumcised, and didst eat with them?

Thanks
 
Jimmy_B said:
The Didache (DOCTRINE OF THE TWELVE APOSTLES)
What do Protestants think about this? The Didache or the “instructions to the twelve (apostles)” It is from the first century and it supports Catholicism.
Click to expand...
Absolutely!

I kid you not…I was about to post a thread on The Didache myself!

Well done Brother J!

👍
 
Rightlydivide said:
It supports Catholicism?
No way.
Did you see the part about baptism? Nothing about infants.
Did you see the part where each congregation gets to pick their own bishops (because the local church was the highest level of office)?
Did you see the part where the prayer at the Lords supper says nothing about it becoming the actual blood and body?

Did you see the part where even the Apostles(so much for apostolic succession myths) have to be tested by local congregations?

Did you see the one where the Catholic encyclopedia confirms everything I just said …
now you have…
Click to expand...
Hello Rightlydivide,

I appreciate your enthusiasm (you would make a great Catholic) and your comments here.

I think that you posted your response to this thread in less than 10 minutes. Did you actually read or research the Didache, Catholic History, and Early Christian History in those 10 minutes or are you jumping to baseless conclusions?

The Didache does support Catholicism and it gives us a glimpse into the early Christian Church, well before any “Protestant movement” (about 1600 years). The Catholic Church had many Popes, starting with Saint Peter and many Ecumenical Councils, where Christian (Catholic) doctrine was defined.

To use this document (The Didache) to support an argument; that the “Didache” does not support Catholicism, by asserting, for example, “Did you see the part about baptism? Nothing about infants (your words), is baseless, irrelevant and ridicules because the Didache does not specifically address “Infant Baptism”.

However, this issue (Infant Baptism) was addressed and defined by the Early Church (the Roman Catholic Church) well before any “Protestant” religions.

Moreover, all of your arguments, which are based on what is not contained in a document (The Didache) are totally irrelevant, baseless and ridicules.

I did not purport that all of Catholic Doctrine can be found in the Didache, however reading your response I assume, that, that is what you mistakenly believed.

I asserted that the Didache supports Catholicism, which it does it supports aspects of Catholicism, please prove me wrong. It also supports Early Christianity in general, and much of it (the Didache) supports your own Christian religion, that should make you happy.

Please give me a specific example, in the context of Catholic history and Christian history, where it (the Didache) does not support Catholicism.

Additional, the quote that you provided, which is allegedly from the “Catholic Encyclopedia” (I use the word “allegedly” because you did not provide a link) is also irrelevant and provides absolutely no evidence, and it does not in anyway, what so ever, support your argument.

Please try again. Thank you. 👍
 
hi paarsurry; one must continue reading from where your quote let off. St Peter was the one who was being brought to task not St Paul .
 
Rightlydivide said:
I love that 70 AD thing…they have no clue if it is 50 AD or 80 AD or what…seriously folks…
Click to expand...
Secularly speaking, it’s dated between 50 AD to 120 AD.

Well before even The Holy Bible.

It is The First Christian Document known to mankind.
 
hi again paarsurreySt. John 1:9 It was the true Light that enlightens every man who comes into the world.St.Matthew 12:21 and in His name will the gentiles hope.the Prophet Isaias 42:1-4
 
Rightlydivide said:
Did you see the part where each congregation gets to pick their own bishops (because the local church was the highest level of office)?

Did you see the part where even the Apostles(so much for apostolic succession myths) have to be tested by local congregations?
Click to expand...
Actually, catholic 'congregations" do choose there own leadership…I see this statement often and it fails to recognize the process by which one becomes first a christina, second a vocation to the priesthood, third becomes ordained and forth is eevated to a bishop…

At every stage of the process, discernment occurs and the christian community affirms …

Now today the “church” is larger, spread overa larger geographic reagion and has ‘elements’ that may be new or different that what they were 2000 years ago…

the same is true for our protestant brethren, their local christian communities are larger, geographically dispersed and one can add theologically fractured over a period of 500 years.

Now today, we [the catholic church] require advanced theology degrees for th priesthood [in addition to years of discernment and formation]. Some protestants likewise … 2000 years ago no one required a “bachelors degree” let alone a masters or doctorate. That is a change ut one that goes unchallenged …

So how does the local church community assist in the selection of priests and bishops?

First, for aperson to become a Christian requires a Christian community to join, the desire of the one to be joined to the community [for an infant this is spoken by the parent on the childs behalf and for a young person or adult it is upon their request], a sponsor to walk with them on the initiation journey, the assent of the faith community who sends them forth to the bishop who calls the [by name], then they request babtism, assent to the leadership of Christ, renounce sin and the works of the devil, … they are made one with Chirst [and Christ’s church]

Second: for those who perceive a calling to the priesthood, they have a sponsoring faith community, who recommends them and who is questioned regarding their life and committment … etc. Years of study, formation and discernment follow before ordination … where the sponsoring community [and those who represent and/or speak for them] has (name removed by moderator)ut …

Third: once a priest, again there is a process … no one self selects themselves … [except perhaps that guy who opens up the “bible church” in a store front or his living room …but then they are catholic priests]

And the local community is not the parish, it is the diocese … and the church is not fractured into little peices … it is one …

for example; we [catholics] did elect our pope … much llike the delegate process we have to select our president … we are represented in the church … and our representatives speak on our behalf …

The Didache is in fact a “catholic” document in that it is essentially the first sacramentary [instructions on liturgy] and catechism [instruction on the fundamentals of the faith]. It was used to instruct catechumens … like scripture it in not meant to be the totality of the faith but a summary. Like scripture it was not to be used by those totally ignorant of all things christian [in a vacuum] but as a companion to the personal instruciton of one knowldegable about the faith …

I love the Didache … a good read, even today 👍
 
Jimmy
Your link
newadvent.org/cathen/04779a.htm

Lets go in order
Now about baptism: this is how to baptize. Give public instruction on all these points, and then “baptize” in running water, "in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit  2If you do not have running water, baptize in some other.  3If you cannot in cold, then in warm. If you have neither, then pour water on the head three times "in the name of the Father,
Click to expand...
Hey, I agree with baptism by immersion and then worse case scenario, if you have to, sprinkling.

The Lords Prayer
"
Our Father in heaven, hallowed be your name; your Kingdom come; your will be done on earth as it is in heaven; give us today our bread for the morrow; and forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors. And do not lead us into temptation, but save us from the evil one, for yours is the power and the glory forever."
Click to expand...
And the part about you being “filled”? The Bible also teaches that this celebration is a meal. Paul of course clarifies that everyone is to begin eating at the same time though.

When Bible believing Christians read the Didache Jimmy, it does nothing but confirm the doctrines of the Bible that we follow.
 
I’ve read the Didache plenty of times in the past, and I am Catholic, however, I am inclined to agree with rightly on one level…

Unless you are fringe, there really isn’t too much in the Didache that is opposed to many mainline protestant denominations…

Protestants and Catholics alike agree that full immersion is best, but it may not always be available, thus making sprinkling or pouring OK. Notice also the Didache says the best way is by full immersion in living water, ie a river or stream.

Also, The Didache talks about the importance of Communion. Something Protestants and Catholics alike agree on. (just the nature of which is argued, however this is not mentioned in the Didache.)

It does talk about fasting, which protestant churches don’t have a problem with per say.

It talks about loving each other… about sin, and the importance of teachers… It talks about false teachers… something both protestants and catholics agree on…

Is it more Catholic leaning in some sections Yes… (ie is there anythign in there contrary to Catholic Teaching?) … but many protestant churches CAN see their belief structure within the Didache as well.

This is because AS THE CATHOLIC CHURCH TEACHES, many protestant churches have a GREAT deal of truth in them.

Saying the Didache disproves protestantism is a stretch. What it does do is bring into question some of the fringe protestants that believe in things like immersion only… But almost ALL mainstream protestants should see at least some support for their belief as well in the Didache…

It was a guide to Christians, written by church fathers because communication was soo poor. Rome, or even a local bishop may not hear about problems within a single parish for some time… However, having a ‘church approved’ guideline certainly helped

In Christ
 
fbl9 said:
hi paarsurry; one must continue reading from where your quote let off. St Peter was the one who was being brought to task not St Paul .
Click to expand...
Also, it was not Paul who first preached the gospel to the gentiles, it was Peter. See Acts chapters 10 and 11.

God bless,
Paul
 
When you read the Didache and consider the faith, beliefs and religious practice of various Christian communities - two groups come first and foremost - the Catholics and the Orthodox …

At least when I read the Didache for the first time [as a protestant christian] that was my experience …

I agree that there is more that unites Christians [Catholic and Protestant] then seperates us. This is still holding true, I believe … not unusual since Christian practice has been maintained for 2000 years … The protestants grew forth from the ancient church …

I believe that the problem comes with time … the longer the time from the origins and the more “unigue” the innovations that are brought into the faith the less the chruch looks [acts, believes] like the early christian community …

As an example: The catholic church holds to the sanctity of life. Unorn children are viewed as God’s gift of life.

A prohibition against abortion [and infanticide] is listed specifically in the Didache and yet many churches in the protestant faith communitities now affirm this practice as a right of choice by the mother… it would seem that those denominations have left the beliefs of the ‘early christians’ behind adopting moral relativism instead …

SImilarly witht he Eucharistic prayers present in the Didache … they present a view of Communion that is far more than a symbolic jesture …

And as one poster already noted, various forms of baptism are listed [so no one form “full immersion”] can truly be the only valid form … Those the words pronounced at baptism [In the name of the Father, the Son and the Hoy Spirit - Trinitarian formula] are required for validity …
 
Jimmy_B said:
The Didache (DOCTRINE OF THE TWELVE APOSTLES)
What do Protestants think about this? The Didache or the “instructions to the twelve (apostles)” It is from the first century and it supports Catholicism.
Click to expand...
Hi Jimmy, the earilest Didache manuscript dates to 1056 AD and is a composite document of four others. Textual critics question if the current Didache is really the early edition. So, at best the Didache reflects Catholic doctrine in 1056 AD, and not neccessary that of early Christianity.
 
YADA said:
Actually, catholic 'congregations" do choose there own leadership…I see this statement often and it fails to recognize the process by which one becomes first a christina, second a vocation to the priesthood, third becomes ordained and forth is eevated to a bishop…

At every stage of the process, discernment occurs and the christian community affirms …

Now today the “church” is larger, spread overa larger geographic reagion and has ‘elements’ that may be new or different that what they were 2000 years ago…

the same is true for our protestant brethren, their local christian communities are larger, geographically dispersed and one can add theologically fractured over a period of 500 years.

Now today, we [the catholic church] require advanced theology degrees for th priesthood [in addition to years of discernment and formation]. Some protestants likewise … 2000 years ago no one required a “bachelors degree” let alone a masters or doctorate. That is a change ut one that goes unchallenged …

So how does the local church community assist in the selection of priests and bishops?

First, for aperson to become a Christian requires a Christian community to join, the desire of the one to be joined to the community [for an infant this is spoken by the parent on the childs behalf and for a young person or adult it is upon their request], a sponsor to walk with them on the initiation journey, the assent of the faith community who sends them forth to the bishop who calls the [by name], then they request babtism, assent to the leadership of Christ, renounce sin and the works of the devil, … they are made one with Chirst [and Christ’s church]

Second: for those who perceive a calling to the priesthood, they have a sponsoring faith community, who recommends them and who is questioned regarding their life and committment … etc. Years of study, formation and discernment follow before ordination … where the sponsoring community [and those who represent and/or speak for them] has (name removed by moderator)ut …

Third: once a priest, again there is a process … no one self selects themselves … [except perhaps that guy who opens up the “bible church” in a store front or his living room …but then they are catholic priests]

And the local community is not the parish, it is the diocese … and the church is not fractured into little peices … it is one …

for example; we [catholics] did elect our pope … much llike the delegate process we have to select our president … we are represented in the church … and our representatives speak on our behalf …

The Didache is in fact a “catholic” document in that it is essentially the first sacramentary [instructions on liturgy] and catechism [instruction on the fundamentals of the faith]. It was used to instruct catechumens … like scripture it in not meant to be the totality of the faith but a summary. Like scripture it was not to be used by those totally ignorant of all things christian [in a vacuum] but as a companion to the personal instruciton of one knowldegable about the faith …

I love the Didache … a good read, even today 👍
Click to expand...
:bowdown2:
 
Rightlydivide said:
It supports Catholicism?
Click to expand...
Owned…:ouch:

2Ti 2:15
Study to shew thyself approved unto God,
a workman that needeth not to be ashamed,
rightly dividing the word of truth.

:confused:

I think that “this” should be your signature!

2 Timothy 2:
14
Of these things put them in remembrance, charging them in the sight of the Lord, that they strive not about words, to no profit, to the subverting of them that hear.

15
Give diligence to present thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, handling aright the word of truth.

16
But shun profane babblings: for they will proceed further in ungodliness,

17
and their word will eat as doth a gangrene: or whom is Hymenaeus an Philetus;

18
men who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already, and overthrow the faith of some.

👍
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top