Eucharist and Lord's Supper

EUCHARIST AND LORD'S SUPPER
93
almost open indication that its author has in mind something other than
:he eU~harist proper. He writes of his blessed cup and bread, 'For concernmg
thIs ~!so the Lord, s3id, "Give not that which is holy unto the dogs" ,
(Matt.. V:l. 6). The blessed bread' of the agape is holy, though not
euchanstIc.
We conclude, then, that Didache ix. and x. are entirely in line with what
we know of the Eastern agape in pre-Nicene times, as Didache xiv. is entirely
representative of second century ideas about the liturgical eucharist.
The book was written as a guide for the laity, not for the clergy, and
elsewhere gives detailed regulations only on things which the laity may do
for themselves. These little agape prayers may be taken as the exact Eastern
equivalents ofHippolytus' general direction to the laity when met without
a cleric at the Lord's supper to 'eucharistise' the food each one for himself,
and then 'eat in the Name of the Lord'. Prophets, as specially inspired
persons, even though laymen, are not bound to use the set forms; just as
the bishop, in virtue of his prophetic charisma, is not bound to follow a set
form in the eucharistic prayer proper.
This is the agape or Lord's supper as celebrated privately by a party of
christian friends. But in the third century in the East it could still be a
corporate and official observance of the whole church. In a Syrian work
written c. A.D. 250, the Didascalia Apostolorum, the author, speaking of the
reception to be accorded to christian strangers visiting another church,
lays it down that 'Ifit be a bishop, let him sit with the bishop; and let him
accord him the honour of his rank, even as himself. And do thou, 0
bishop, invite him to discourse to thy people; for the exhortation and
admonition of strangers is very profitable, especially as it is written:
"There is no prophet that is acceptable in his own place." And when you
offer the oblation, let him speak. But if he is wise and gives the honour
[i.e. of celebrating the eucharist] to thee, at least let him speak over the
CUp'.1 Here we have evidence of the feeling that the bishop is the only
proper prophetic teacher and priest of his own church, who ought not in
any circumstances to be replaced at the eucharist by anyone else, however
distinguished, when he is present. It witnesses also to the bishop's 'discourse'
or exhortation at the agape, of which Hippolytus speaks. And it
mentions the use of a cup in the East as an important element in that rite,
just as in the Ethiopic order (c)and in the Didache (ix. 2).
The last text of any importance or interest on the Lord's supper or
agape which we need consider comes from an Egyptian rule for virgins
leading an ascetic life in their own homes, in the days before the religious
life for women in convents had been fully organised. It is traditionally
ascribed to S. Athanasius, an attribution which has been both questioned
and defended by modern scholars without decisive reasons on either side.
But it appears to be Egyptian and of the early fourth century. It runs thus:
1 Did. Ap., ii. 58. Ed. R. H. Connolly, 1929, p. 122.