SERIES IV.2: THE LANGUAGE OF LINEAGE โ DIDACHE
Holiness โข The Children โข The Dogs
The final statement of the Didacheโs Eucharistic instruction introduces another expression that deserves to be read through the language of Christ Himself. The Didache does not merely establish a baptismal requirement; it appeals directly to a saying of the Lord concerning what is holy and those to whom it may be given. For we have been set apart from the world, a holy race and as Peter quotes so adequately well: โYou shall be holy, for I am holy.โ To understand why this saying is invoked here, we must examine the distinction Christ Himself makes between the children of the household and the dogs outside it.
But let no one eat or drink of your Eucharist, unless they have been baptized into the name of the Lord; for concerning this also the Lord has said, โDo not give what is holy to dogs.โ
โ Didache 9.5
The concept of dogs, used in the New Testament of Christ rings a similar bell to this passage in the Didache; Christ tells us not to give what is holy unto the dogs nor cast your pearls to swine (Matthew 7:5), but who are the dogs? The implication is significant for understanding the language: โdogsโ functions here as a designation for those outside the Israelite household and lineage, while the โchildrenโ are identified with the house of Israel. Christโs statement about what is holy must therefore be read that distinguishes between the covenant household and those outside of it. Why would we cast our pearls to non-white races but withhold the truth of the Gospel to our own people? We would not.
But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israelโฆ โฆIt is not meet to take the childrenโs bread, and to cast it to dogsโฆ
โ Matthew 15:24;26
The Didache then uses Christโs saying to explain why participation in its Eucharist is restricted to those baptized into the Lordโs name nor those not set apart, but those of the covenant. Thus, rather than assuming that โdogsโ is a generic insult as we call lascivious men dogs in the modern age, Matthew gives us a concrete example in which the terminology corresponds to those outside the house of Israel; this distinction is important when reading the passages in the Didache.
Ad fontes.
IV.1
