MELITO OF SARDIS. - Polycrates of Ephesus, in a letter to Pope Victor, names M. among "the great luminaries" of the Church in Asia Minor, calls him "eunuch," full of the Holy Spirit, who awaits the resurrection from the dead (the old idea, widespread also among the Encratites, of a relationship between virginal life and resurrection is probably presupposed: Eusebius, Hist. eccl., V, 24, 25). Tertullian speaks of M.'s "elegans et declamatorium ingenium," but knows that in ecclesiastical circles he was regarded as a "prophet" (Tertullian, in Jerome, De vir. ill., 24). It is known that he was bishop of Sardis in Lydia in the times from Antoninus Pius to Marcus Aurelius and that he had been in Jerusalem to inform himself about ecclesiastical tradition (v. B. Kötting, Peregrinatio religiosa, Münster 1950, p. 85). He died before 190.
He was the author of a small apology in defense of the Christian "philosophy" (form of life), addressed to Marcus Aurelius (Eusebius, Hist. eccl., IV, 26, 1), notable for the author's Roman patriotism. Another work dealt with Easter, in which the tradition of the Quartodecimans was defended; another: On the Right Conduct of Life and the Prophets (cf. St. Jerome, On the Lives of the Prophets), not necessarily anti-Montanist, because nothing is known of an anti-Montanist activity of M. Other titles of writings are, e.g., On Hospitality, On Sunday, On the Corporeality of God, the latter book attacked by Origen (v. also Gennadius, De Eccles. dogmat., 4). The title of the book, De oboedientia fidei sensuum, becomes comprehensible by reading Pseudo-Cyprian, Adversus Iudaeos, 1. Of the book De laxacro a Greek fragment has been preserved (v. Ad. Harnack, Marcion, 2nd ed., Leipzig 1924, p. 421 ff.). Fragments of M. in Syriac in the Florilegium Edessenum anonymum (syriace ante 562) published by J. Rucker (1933). The most important remnant of M.'s works is the homily "on the Passion," preserved in a papyrus text and published by C. Bonner (The Homily on the Passion by Melito (Studies and documents, 12), London 1940). This text demonstrates not only the author's theology, but also makes understandable the origin of the great official rhetoric of the Byzantine Church.
Other writings are wrongly attributed to M.: an apology in Syriac: a Clavis scripturae in lingua latina (edited by G. B. Pitra, in Anal. sacra, II, Tivoli 1884); the already cited Adversus Iudaeos is interesting. This writing, which in the 4th century was attributed to St. Cyprian (Mommsen's list) cannot, conversely, be his work: it is a sermon that from the first to the last chapter reveals the theology and language of M. The homily, if it is not a Latin translation of a homily of M., is certainly the work of someone who knew him thoroughly. The attribution of the Adversus Iudaeos to Novatian is impossible: it is probably from the 3rd century and not written in Africa.
Bibliography6 works
Journ. theol. studies, 44 (1943), p. 41 ff.; P. Kahle, Was Melito's Homely on the Passion originally written in Syriac?, ibid., pp. 52-56; A. Wifstrand, The homily of M. on the Passion, in Vigiliae christianae, 2 (1948), p. 201 ff.; R. M. Grant, M. on Baptism, ibid., 4 (1950), p. 33 ff.; Adversus Iudaeos, in Cypriani opera, III (CSEL, 3, III), Vienna 1871, p. 133 ff.; on this work v. H. Jordan, Melito und Novaziano, in Archiv für lateinische Lexikographie, Leipzig 1902, pp. 59-68 and E. Peterson, Ps. Cyprian Adv. Iudaeos und M., in Vigiliae christianae, 5 (1951).