The Didache is a short text, which was likely intended to be committed to memory, offering training in 'The Way' of the Lord, the practices of the churches, and in the community's hope for the future. Dating from the first century, and quite plausible from before 70 AD, it offers us a unique vantage point into the concerns, attitudes, and praxis of the communities who would have heard our gospels from the lips of the evangelists. The purpose of this paper is to bring it to light in the hope that this can be further studied in relations to the gospels and mission.Discovered in the library of a monastery in Constantinople in 1875, the Didache is one of the under-appreciated resources from the earliest decades of the churches. 1 It is a short text, which in all likelihood was intended to be committed to memory, offering training in 'The Way' of the Lord, the practices of the churches, and in the community's hope for the future. 2 It was not intended for use by a specialist group, but for use by all the members of the churches; nor was it intended to be 'a high-level document' explaining faith or preaching 'the gospel,' 3 but rather it provided information on Christian praxis so that an individual might live as a disciple within a community, know how the group conducts its common affairs, and possess that information in such a way that s/he could initiate new members into the group. Dating from the first century, and quite plausible from before 70 AD, it offers us a unique vantage point into the concerns, attitudes, and praxis of the communities who would have heard our gospels from the lips of the evangelists. 4 It is customary to spend the first section of any paper on the Didache explaining its value as a contextualizing source for the documents in the canonical collection, justifying the manner by which it is dated, and explaining how its praxis developed in the churches over subsequent generations thereby leaving the extant form of the Didache to disappear as out-dated; and sometimes, incidentally, by way of the same process to explain why it was never read in the liturgy and, therefore, did not become part of the canonical collection. Then, this lengthy preamble over, the remaining time is spent on the particular theme of the paper. I, however, wish to get straight to the