Dean Inge of St Paul’s was reportedly asked by EC Ratcliff whether he was interested in liturgy. ‘No,’ said the Dean, ‘and neither do I collect postage stamps.’
I would add that neither do I indulge in NT textual criticism (despite David Parker being one of my earliest teachers).
So I was surprised to be asked my opinion by a correspondent on whether the Didascalist knew the Pericope adulterae. There is reference to this, or to something comparable, at DA 2.24.3. But I have no opinion as to what.
If, however, you do not receive a penitent back, being without mercy, you have sinned against the Lord God, since you would not have obeyed nor trusted in God our Saviour, nor acted as did he on account of the woman who had sinned, when the elders set her before him and departed, leaving judgement in his hands. He looked into her heart and asked whether the elders had condemned her (So Lat. and Const. App. Syr. recasts into direct speech). When she said not, he said to her: ‘Go, nor do I condemn you.’
Note my belief that the reading of CA and Lat. should be preferred to that of Syr. (which more closely represents the canonical text.)
For those who are interested do note https://danielbwallace.com/2013/06/26/where-is-the-story-of-the-woman-caught-in-adultery-really-from/ (though this is old news). This post also contains a link to Hughes’ article in Novum Testamentum.