MELITO: Bishop of Sardis. He flourished in the reign of Marcus Aurelius (161-180). Of his numerous works in most cases only the titles are known from a list of Eusebius probably copied from a collection in the library of Cæsarea. The list is as follows (NPNF, i. 203 sqq.): two books " On the Passover "; " On the Conduct of Life and the Prophets "; " On the Church "; " On the Lord's Day "; " On the Faith of Man ";" On [his] Creation "; " On the Obedience of Faith "; " On the Senses "; " On Soul and Body"; " On Baptism"; " On Truth "; " On Faith "; " On the Birth of Christ "; " On Prophecy "; " On Hospitality "; " The Key "; " On the Devil "; " On the Apocalypse of John"; " On the Corporeality of God "; " Apology to Antoninus "; " Selections "; and perhaps a work "On the Suffering of Christ." There are extant only remnants of the " Selections," of the " Apol ogy," and the works " On Baptism " and " On the Passover." The Greek fragments edited by Ana stasius Sinaita are quoted under titles not mentioned by Eusebius. There are also some Syriac fragments which undoubtedly go back to indirect Greek

tradition, for probably the Syriac Church never possessed his works complete. Of the works falsely ascribed to him may be mentioned the Syriac Apology, which can not be identical with the Apology mentioned by Eusebius, for the sentences quoted from it are not found in the other, but most probably, as Nöldeke has explained, was a Syriac original work. Under the name of Melito, Pitra published a Latin " Key to the Scripture "which he considered a compilation from the "Key" of Melito; but Steitz and others have proved its spuriousness. From the scantiness of the material it is impossible to estimate justly Melito's importance for the history of church and doctrine. The titles of his works show that he took an interest in the dogmatical questions of his time and participated in the Paschal controversies which preceded the great schism over Easter. He was probably interested in Montanism, as appears from titles like "On the Conduct of Life and the Prophets," " On the Church," or " On Prophecy," yet he can not be called a Montanist (A. Schwegler, Mort taniantua, p. 223, Ann. 5, Tübingen, 1841); for the manner in which Tertulhan wrote of him is against such an assumption. His attitude in this matter can be understood if he is compared with Irenams, whom he resembled also in other ways. His moral strictness, which made him a celibate, and his high regard for prophecy and spiritual matters explain his close relation to Montanism, and still more make clear its spread; for his asceticism showed the universality of the thoughts that it emphasized. In his Christology Melito laid stress on the distinction of both natures. His separating the Apocrypha from the canonical books shows that his theological education surpassed the ordinary standard. A great many surmises have been made in regard to his doctrine of God in connection with his work "On the Corporeality of God," but he probably expressed there the same realism that was represented by Tertullian.

(Erwin Preuschen.)

Bibliography: The fragments are collected in M. J. Routh, Reliquie sacra, i. 115 sqq., Oxford, 1846; J. C. T. Otto, Corpus apoWetarum Christianorum, ix. 410 sqq., Jena, 1872; and W. Cureton, Spicnlepium Syriacum, London, 1855. An Eng. transl. is found in ANF, viii. 750-762. The earlier literature, named in ANF, Bibliography, pp. 110-111, is in the main antiquated. Consult: Harnack, Litteratur, i. 246-255, ii. 1, pp. 358 sqq., 517 sqq., 522 sqq., ii. 2 passim; DCB, iii. 894-900 (important); A. Ehrhardt, in Strasaburger theologischu Studien, i., Supplement (1900), 258 sqq.; Krüger, History, pp. 123-129.