www.newadvent.org Open in urlscan Pro
2400:52e0:1e00::1080:1  Public Scan

Form analysis
1 forms found in the DOM

../utility/search.htm

<form id="searchbox_000299817191393086628:ifmbhlr-8x0" action="../utility/search.htm">
  <!-- Hidden Inputs -->
  <input type="hidden" name="safe" value="active">
  <input type="hidden" name="cx" value="000299817191393086628:ifmbhlr-8x0">
  <input type="hidden" name="cof" value="FORID:9">
  <!-- Search Box -->
  <label for="searchQuery" id="searchQueryLabel">Search:</label>
  <input id="searchQuery" name="q" type="text" size="25" aria-labelledby="searchQueryLabel">
  <!-- Submit Button -->
  <label for="submitButton" id="submitButtonLabel" class="visually-hidden">Submit Search</label>
  <input id="submitButton" type="submit" name="sa" value="Search" aria-labelledby="submitButtonLabel">
</form>

Text Content

 

Search: Submit Search



 Home   Encyclopedia   Summa   Fathers   Bible   Library 

 A  B  C  D  E  F  G  H  I  J  K  L  M  N  O  P  Q  R  S  T  U  V  W  X  Y  Z 


Home > Catholic Encyclopedia > M > Meletius of Lycopolis


MELETIUS OF LYCOPOLIS

Please help support the mission of New Advent and get the full contents of this
website as an instant download. Includes the Catholic Encyclopedia, Church
Fathers, Summa, Bible and more — all for only $19.99...

Meletius, Bishop of Lycopolis in Egypt, gave his name to a schism of short
duration. There is uncertainty as to the dates of his birth, his death, and his
episcopate. It is known, however, that he was bishop of the above-mentioned city
as early as 303, since in a council held about 306 at Alexandria by Peter,
archbishop of that city, Meletius was deposed for several reasons, among others
for sacrificing to idols. Meagre references by St. Athanasius were our only
source of information until important documents were discovered in the
eighteenth century by Scipio Maffei at Verona in a manuscript dealing with the
Meletian schism in Egypt. The three documents preserved in Latin are undoubtedly
authentic. There is first, a letter of protest by four Egyptian bishops,
Hesychius, Pachomius, Theodore, and Phileas, dating at the latest from 307, from
the very beginning of the schism of Meletius, and before the excommunication of
the latter who was termed by the bishops, dilectus comminister in Domino
(beloved fellow minister in the Lord). "We have heard", said the bishops,
"grievous reports regarding Meletius who is accused of troubling the divine law
and ecclesiastical rules. Quite recently, a number of witnesses having confirmed
the reports, we feel compelled to write this letter. Meletius is undoubtedly
aware of the very ancient law which forbids a bishop to ordain outside his own
diocese. Nevertheless, without regard for this law, and without consideration
for the great bishop and father, Peter of Alexandria, and the incarcerated
bishops, he has created general confusion. To vindicate himself he will perhaps
declare that he was compelled to act thus, as the congregations were without
pastors. Such a defence however, is worthless, as a number of visitors
(circumeuntes) had been appointed. Were they neglectful of their duties, their
case should have been presented before the incarcerated bishops. If the latter
had been martyred, he could have appealed to Peter of Alexandria, and thus have
obtained the authority to ordain". Second, an anonymous note added to the
foregoing letter and worded thus: "Meletius having received the letter and read
it, paid no attention to the protest and presented himself neither before the
incarcerated bishops, nor Peter of Alexandria. After all these bishops, priests,
and deacons had died in their dungeons at Alexandria, he immediately repaired to
that city. Among other intriguers there were two, a certain Isidore and one
Arius, seemingly honourable, both of them desirous of being admitted to the
priesthood. Aware of the ambition of Meletius and what he sought, they hastened
to him, and gave him the names of the visitors (circumeuntes) appointed by
Peter. Meletius excommunicated them and ordained two others, one of them
detained in prison, the other in the mines." On learning this, Peter wrote to
his Alexandrian flock. Here comes the third document, in which occurs the phrase
interpreted as follows: "Having heard", said Peter, "that Meletius, without
considering the letter of the blessed bishops and martyrs, has intruded himself
into my diocese, and deprived my deputies of their power, and consecrated
others, I advise you to avoid all communion with him until I can bring him
before me face to face in the presence of prudent men, and investigate this
affair".



The conduct of Meletius was all the more reprehensible in as much as his
insubordination was that of one in very high office. St. Epiphanius and Theodore
tell us that Meletius stood next in rank to Peter of Alexandria, of whom he was
jealous and whom he was basely endeavouring to supplant at the moment, when
Peter was forced to flee from persecution and live in hiding. It was not only
against Peter, but also against his immediate successors, Achillas and
Alexander, that Meletius maintained his false position. This we know from St.
Athanasius, an authoritative witness. Comparing the information given us by St.
Athanasius with that furnished by the documents above, the date of the beginning
of the Meletian schism may be determined with fair accuracy. It was evidently
during the episcopate of Peter, who occupied the See of Alexandria from 300 to
311. Now St. Athanasius in his "Epistola ad episcopos" states positively that
"the Meletians were declared schismatics over fifty-five years ago".
Unfortunately the date of this letter is contested; the choice lies between 356
or 361. However, St. Athanasius adds: "The Arians were declared heretical
thirty-six years ago", i.e. at the Council of Nicæa (325). Apparently,
therefore, Athanasius was writing in 361. If now we deduct fifty-five years, we
have the year 306 for the condemnation of the Meletian schism; and as the
persecution of Diocletian raged bitterly between 303 and 305, the beginnings of
the schism seem to belong to the year 304, or 305. St. Epiphanius, Bishop of
Salamis in Cyprus gives a circumstantial account (Haer. lxviii) in contradiction
with the foregoing narrative. According to him, the schism arose from a
disagreement between Meletius and Peter regarding the reception of certain of
the faithful, particularly of ecclesiastics, who had abjured the Faith during
the persecution. This account, preferred by some historians to the statement of
St. Athanasius, is no longer credible since the discovery of the aforesaid
documents by Maffei at Verona. How, then, explain the origin of the account
given by Epiphanius? It seems to us it arose in this manner: after Peter's death
Meletius was arrested and sent to the mines; on his way, he stopped at
Eleutheropolis, and there founded a church of his sect; Eleutheropolis being the
native town of Epiphanius, the latter naturally came in contact with Meletians
in his early days. They would of course represent in a most favourable light the
origin of their sect; and thus their partial and misleading narrative was
afterwards inserted by Epiphanius in his great work on heresies. Finally, the
references to the Meletian schism by Sozomen and Theodoret quite accord with the
original documents discovered at Verona, and more or less with what St.
Athanasius has upon the same subject. As to St. Augustine, he merely mentions
the schism in passing and very likely follows St. Epiphanius.

The suppression of the Meletian schism was one of the three important matters
that came before the Council of Nicæa. Its decree has been preserved in the
synodical epistle addressed to the Egyptian bishops. Meletius, it was decided,
should remain in his own city of Lycopolis, but without exercising authority or
the power of ordaining; moreover he was forbidded to go into the environs of the
town or to enter another diocese for the purpose of ordaining its subjects. He
retained his episcopal title, but the ecclesiastics ordained by him were to
receive again the imposition of hands, the ordinations performed by Meletius
being therefore regarded as invalid. Throughout the diocese where they were
found, those ordained by him were always to yield precedence to those ordained
by Alexander, nor were they to do anything without the consent of Bishop
Alexander. In the event of the death of a non-Meletian bishop or ecclesiastic,
the vacant preferment might be given to a Meletian, provided he were worthy and
the popular election were ratified by Alexander. As to Meletius himself,
episcopal rights and prerogatives were taken from him owing to his incorrigible
habit of everywhere exciting confusion. These mild measures, however, were in
vain; the Meletians joined the Arians and did more harm than ever, being among
the worst enemies of St. Athanasius. Referring to this attempt at reunion the
latter said: "Would to God it had never happened."



About 325 the Meletians counted in Egypt twenty-nine bishops, Meletius included,
and in Alexandria itself, four priests, three deacons, and one army chaplain.
Conformably to the Nicene decree, Meletius lived first at Lycopolis in the
Thebaid, but after the negotiations which united his party to the Arians. The
date of his death is not known. He nominated his friend, John, as his successor.
Theodoret mentions very superstitious Meletian monks who practised Jewish
ablutions. The Meletians died out after the middle of the fifth century.




SOURCES

CEILLIER, Histoire Générale des auteurs ecclésiastiques, III (Paris, 1732),
678-81), II (1765), 615-16; HEFELE, Meletius in Kirchenlex., ed. KAULEN, VIII
(1893), 1221 sq.; ACHELIS, Meletius von Lykopolis in Realencyclopædie, ed.
HAUCK, XII (1903), 558-62; HEFELE, Histoire des Conciles, ed. LECLERCQ, (1907),
211-12, 488-503.


ABOUT THIS PAGE

APA citation. Leclercq, H. (1911). Meletius of Lycopolis. In The Catholic
Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10164a.htm

MLA citation. Leclercq, Henri. "Meletius of Lycopolis." The Catholic
Encyclopedia. Vol. 10. New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1911.
<http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10164a.htm>.

Transcription. This article was transcribed for New Advent by WGKofron. With
thanks to Fr. John Hilkert and St. Mary's Church, Akron, Ohio.

Ecclesiastical approbation. Nihil Obstat. October 1, 1911. Remy Lafort, S.T.D.,
Censor. Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York.

Contact information. The editor of New Advent is Kevin Knight. My email address
is webmaster at newadvent.org. Regrettably, I can't reply to every letter, but I
greatly appreciate your feedback — especially notifications about typographical
errors and inappropriate ads.

Copyright © 2023 by New Advent LLC. Dedicated to the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

CONTACT US | ADVERTISE WITH NEW ADVENT