Reading these early texts reminds me of why I am drawn to seeing Orthodoxy as the church representing and continuing early Christianity. For example, in Protestantism, one of the big debates is over whether to have priestly roles or not (Anglicans do, Lutherans don't). In the Didache though from the 1st c., it talks about priestly roles.
The Didache ("Teaching"), also known as The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles...
Itinerant apostles and prophets are important, serving as "chief priests" and possibly celebrating the Eucharist. ... Lost for centuries, a Greek manuscript of the Didache was rediscovered in 1873 by Philotheos Bryennios, Metropolitan of Nicomedia in the Codex Hierosolymitanus. A Latin version of the first five chapters was discovered in 1900 by J. Schlecht.
The fact that the document was discovered in the 19th century after being lost for so long gives me the idea that there could still be 1st c. Christian manuscripts out there, buried or in archives, that we don't have today. The manuscript we found wasn't transcribed in the 1st c. though:
The text was lost, but scholars knew of it through the writing of later church fathers, some of whom had drawn heavily on it. In 1873 in Istanbul, metropolitan Philotheos Bryennios found a Greek copy of the Didache, written in 1056, and he published it in 1883... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Didache
Chapter 8 suggests that fasts are not to be on Monday and Thursday "with the hypocrites" — presumably non-Christian Jews, such as the Pharisees — but on Wednesday and Friday. Fasting Wednesday and Friday plus worshiping on Sunday constituted the Christian week. Nor must Christians pray with their Judaic brethren, instead they shall say the Lord's Prayer three times a day.
Here in the first century we can see the separation already between Christian and rabbinical communities, which further goes against the modern Messianic movement that sees 1st c. Christianity as compatible with rabbinical practices and community. For those of you who know Greek, here is how the Didache gives the Lord's Prayer. Let me know if you see any major differences.
Πάτερ ἡμῶν ὁ ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ, ἁγιασθήτω τὸ ὄνομά σου, ἐλθέτω ἡ βασιλεία σου, γενηθήτω τὸ θέλημά σου ὡς ἐν οὐρανῷ καὶ ἐπὶ γῆς· τὸν ἄρτον ἡμῶν τὸ ἐπιούσιον δὸς ἡμῖν, ὡς καὶ ἡμεῖς ἀφίεμεν τοῖς οφειλέταις ἡμῶν, καὶ μὴ εἰσενέγκῃς ἡμᾶς εἰς πειρασμόν, ἀλλὰ ῥῦσαι ἡμᾶς ἀπὸ τοῦ πονηροῦ· ὅτι σοῦ ἐστιν ἡ δύναμις καὶ ἡ δόξα εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας. 3. τρὶς τῆς ἡμέρας οὕτω προσεύχεσθε.
Burton Mack makes an interesting observation about Christian communities' skepticism towards itinerant Christian "prophets" in the Didache:
Generosity was obviously thought to be a prime Christian virtue, but in practice one had to be careful, for others could easily take advantage of the Christian. This was especially the case with "false" prophets who showed up and wanted the congregation to feed them. The instruction was not to "receive" any prophet who asked for food or money while speaking "in a spirit" (Did. 11:12), and not to allow any "true" prophet (who did not do that) to stay longer than two or three days unless he was willing to settle down, learn a craft, and "work for his bread" (Did. 12:2-5). It is obvious that the Didache was written with resident congregations in mind...It's hard for me to know what to make of the fact that the Didache does not clearly mention the doctrines about Christ's unique divine Sonship and Godhood, the Incarnation, and Real Presence in the elements of the Eucharist.
For example, in the section on the Eucharist, it says:
THE THANKSGIVING SACRAMENT
1) Now concerning the Thanksgiving meal, give thanks in this manner.
2) First, concerning the cup:
We thank You, our Father,
For the Holy Vine of David Your servant,
Whom You made known to us through Your Servant;
May the glory be Yours forever.
3) Concerning the broken bread:
We thank You, our Father,
For the life and knowledge
Which You made known to us through Your Servant;
May the glory be Yours forever.
As this broken bread was scattered over the mountains,
And was gathered together to become one,
So let Your Body of Faithful be gathered together
From the ends of the earth into Your kingdom;
for the glory and power are Yours forever.
5) But let no one eat or drink of your Thanksgiving, unless they have been baptized; for concerning this is taught, "Do not give what is holy to dogs."
Calling Jesus the "Vine of David" and saying that this "concerns" the communion "cup" implies to me that Jesus is the vine juice in the cup.
Some modern writers have claimed that this implies that these supernatural doctrines were unknown to the authors of the Didache. An alternate, more likely explanation in my mind is that the Didache's writings on the topic were not meant as an open revelation of the teachings known to Baptized Christians who had undergone catechumenates, but rather were for public exposition and were meant primarily to teach observances. For example, just because the Didache does not explain the theological meaning of its instruction to "baptize in the Name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit" doesn't mean that the Didache's writers didn't attach central theological value to this idea in the form of Trinitarianism. I am very skeptical that a document that scholars now called Q ever existed.
Q is a compilation of the passages that are in Matthew and Luke, but not in Mark. To explain the origin of those passages, some modern Western scholars invented the idea that there was a separate document they called Q that those passages were taken from. Church fathers never mentioned Document Q. It's more likely to me that Matthew or Luke just took the "Q" passages from each other's texts.