Misplaced Pages

Meletius of Antioch: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 21:45, 22 May 2016 editStr1977 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers59,126 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit Revision as of 00:36, 2 November 2024 edit undoFolly Mox (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users14,224 edits →First period and exile: rm inline el to blog, fix another inline cite with cs1 templateTags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit Advanced mobile editNext edit →
(48 intermediate revisions by 31 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Short description|Christian bishop of Antioch from 360 to 381}}
{{Eastern Christianity}}
{{redirect2|Meletian schism|Meletians|the similarly-named schism in Egypt|Melitians|its namesake|Melitius of Lycopolis}}
Saint '''Meletius of Antioch''' (Μελέτιος) (died 381) was a ] ], or ], from 360 until his death. There were contrasting views about his theological position: on the one hand, he was exiled three times under ] emperors; on the other, he was strongly opposed by those faithful to the memory of the staunchly ] ], whom the ] of Melitene deposed for his Homousianism (] trinitarianism), which they considered a heresy, and by Saint ], the firm opponent of Arianism. One of his last acts was to preside over the ] in 381.
]
'''Saint Meletius''' (Greek: Μελέτιος, ''Meletios'') was a ] ] from 360 until his death in 381. However, his episcopate was dominated by a schism, usually called the '''Meletian schism'''.


* During the reigns of the ] (Homoean) emperors Constantius and Valens, he was exiled in 361–362, 365–366 and 371–378, implying his opposition to Homoianism.
⚫ He was born at ] in ] of wealthy and noble parents. He first appears (c. 357) as a supporter of ], bishop of ], the leader of that party in the episcopate which supported the Homoean formula by which the emperor ] sought for a compromise between the ] and the ]. The Homoiousians held that God and Jesus Christ are of like essence, the Homoousians that they are, as stated in the ], of the same essence (see ] and ]). Meletius thus makes his debut as an ecclesiastic of the court party, and as such became bishop of Sebaste in succession to the Arian ]. The appointment was resented by the Homoousian clergy, and Meletius retired to Beroea.<ref>{{CathEncy|wstitle=Meletius of Antioch}}</ref>


* Meletius was also strongly opposed by a rival pro-Nicene bishop named ] who was faithful to the memory of ]. "The fragments of Eustathius that survive present a doctrine that is close to Marcellus. ... Eustathius insists there is only one hypostasis."<ref>{{Cite book |last=Ayres |first=Lewis |title=Nicaea and its Legacy, An Approach to Fourth-Century Trinitarian Theology |year=2004}}</ref> While ] and bishop Damasus of Rome opposed Meletius and supported Paulinus, Basil of Caesarea supported Meletius.<ref>“Paulinus was a rival of Basil's friend and ally Meletius.” (Hanson, p. 801) “Basil would not desert Meletius and Athanasius would not recognize him (Meletius) as bishop of Antioch.” (Hanson, p. 797)</ref>
⚫ According to ] he attended the ] of ] in the autumn of 359, and then subscribed to the Acacian formula. Early in 360 he became bishop of Antioch, succeeding Eudoxius, who had been translated to the see of Constantinople. Early the following year, 361, he was in exile. According to an old tradition, supported by evidence drawn from ] and ], this was due to a sermon preached before the emperor Constantius, in which he revealed Homousian views. This explanation, however, is rejected by ] - the sermon contains nothing inconsistent with the Acacian position favoured by the court party; on the other hand, there is evidence of conflicts with the clergy, quite apart from any questions of orthodoxy, which may have led to the bishop's deposition.


One of Meletius' last acts was to preside over the ] in 381. He died during that council.
The successor of Meletius was ], who had fallen with ] under the ban of ]; and Loofs explains the ''sub fidei mutatio'' which ] ascribes to Meletius to the dogmatic opposition of the deposed bishop to his successor. In Antioch itself Meletius continued to have adherents, who held separate services in the Apostolic church in the old town. The Meletian schism was complicated, moreover, by the presence in the city of another anti-Arian sect, stricter adherents of the Homousian formula, maintaining the tradition of the deposed bishop ] and governed at this time by the ] ]. The synod of ] sent deputies to attempt an arrangement between the two anti-Arian Churches; but before they arrived Paulinus had been consecrated bishop by ]. When in consequence of the emperor ]'s contemptuous policy Meletius returned, he found himself as one of three rival bishops.


Meletius' ] was remarkable in view of his great private wealth. He is venerated as a saint and confessor in the ], ] and ] churches.<ref name="EB1911">{{EB1911|inline=y|wstitle=Meletius of Antioch|volume=18|pages=93–94}}</ref> His feast day is 12 February.<ref>{{cite encyclopedia |editor-link1=F. L. Cross |editor-link2=E. A. Livingstone |editor-first1=F. L. |editor-first2=E. A. |editor-last1=Cross |editor-last2=Livingstone |title=Melitius, St |encyclopedia=The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church |edition=3rd rev. |publisher=Oxford University Press |year=2009 |orig-year=2005 |url=https://www.oxfordreference.com/view10.1093/acref/9780192802903.001.0001/acref-9780192802903-e-4464}}</ref>
⚫ The orthodox ] party, notably ] himself, held communion with Paulinus only; twice, in 365 and 371 or 372, Meletius was exiled by decree of the Arian emperor ]. A further complication was added when, in 375, ], one of Meletius' presbyters, was consecrated bishop by the heretical bishop ]. After the death of Valens in 378, the Western Emperor ] removed Euzoeus from Antioch, handing over the churches to Meletius. ], the new Emperor of the East, also favoured Meletius, who had been more and more approximating to the views of the ] and upon his return to Antioch was hailed as the leader of orthodoxy. As such he presided in October 379 over the great synod of Antioch, in which the dogmatic agreement of East and West was established. He helped ] to the see of Constantinople and consecrated him and also presided over the ] at Constantinople in 381.


==Bishop of Sebaste==
However, Paulinus was the man favoured by Rome and Alexandria. Jerome accompanied Paulinus back to Rome in order to get more support for him. Ambrose hoped that a general council would be called in support of his friend.{{clarifyme}} He hoped that the Pope would be the influence to make this happen. "Ambrose was agitating for a general council to bring matters to a head, and succeeded in persuading the western emperor, Gratian, to convoke one in Rome. A number of western metropolitans assembled there in the summer of 382, but the east declined to cooperate. Theodosius had no wish to see the settlement he was establishing upset by western meddling, and had already re-convened the council of the previous year at Constantinople. When the belated western summons reached them, the eastern bishops gathered there sent a courteous but firm reply, excusing themselves from attending, apart from a token delegation of three, but not yielding an inch on the disputed issues."<ref>Kelly, J. N. D., (1975), "Jerome: His life, writings and controversies", (Hendrickson Publishers; Peabody, MA), pp80-81.</ref>
⚫ Meletius was born at ] in ] of wealthy and noble parents. He first appears around 357 as a supporter of ], bishop of ], the leader of that local faction that supported the ] formula, which says that the Son is like the Father without reference to ] or ]. In contrast, the Homoiousians held that God and Jesus Christ are of ''like'' essence and the Homoousians that they are, as stated in the ], of the ''same'' essence. Meletius thus first appears as an ecclesiastic of the court party, and as such became ] in succession to ]. The appointment was resented by the Homoousian clergy, and Meletius resigned the see.<ref name=Leclerq/>


==Bishop of Antioch==
⚫ The two remaining factions which divided the Antiochene Church were orthodox but to unite them was a difficult move.<ref></ref> A temporary pacification ensued, when six of the leading presbyters took an oath not to seek episcopal consecration themselves but to accept as bishop of Antioch whichever of the two rivals outlived the other.
===First period and exile===
⚫ According to ], Meletius attended the ] in the autumn of 359, and then subscribed to the Acacian (Homoean) formula. Early in 360 he became bishop of Antioch, succeeding ], who had been translated to the see of Constantinople. Early the following year (361), he was in exile. According to an old tradition, supported by evidence drawn from ] and ], this was due to a sermon preached before the emperor ], in which he revealed Homoousian views. This explanation, however, is rejected by G. F. Loofs on the grounds that the sermon contains nothing inconsistent with the Acacian position favoured by the court party; on the other hand, there is evidence of conflicts with the clergy, quite apart from any questions of orthodoxy, which may have led to the bishop's deposition.<ref name="EB1911"/> Meletius believed that truth lay in delicate distinctions, but his formula was so indefinite that it is difficult to grasp it with precision. He was neither a thorough Nicene nor a decided Arian.<ref name=Leclerq/>


The successor of Meletius was ], an Eusebian.<ref>The traditional term 'Arian' is now recognized to be "a serious misnomer.” (Hanson, p. xvii) “This controversy is mistakenly called Arian.” (Ayres, p. 14) Arius did not leave behind a school of followers. “No clear party sought to preserve Arius' theology.” (Ayres, p. 14)</ref> In Antioch itself Meletius continued to have adherents, who held separate services in the apostolic church in the old town. The Meletian Schism was a dispute in Antioch between two pro-Nicene groups; the Meletians, who maintained that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are three hypostases, and the older pro-Nicene group, the Eustathians, who taught a single hypostasis. The Eustathians described the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as three ], but Basil of Caesarea objected that the Sabellians also used this term and that it does not make sufficient distinction between the Persons. Basil wrote: <blockquote>“It is not enough to count differences in the prosōpa. It is necessary also to confess that each prosōpon exists in a true hypostasis. The mirage of prosōpa without hypostaseis is not denied even by Sabellius, who said that the same God, though he is one subject, is transformed according to the need of each occasion and is thus spoken of now as Father, now as Son, and now as Holy Spirit.” (Epistle 210.5.36–41.)</blockquote>Philip Schaff summarized the Meletian Schism as follows:<blockquote>“The doctrinal difference between the Meletians and the old Nicenes consisted chiefly in this: that the latter acknowledged three hypostases in the divine trinity, the former only three prosopa; the one laying the stress on the triplicity of the divine essence, the other on its unity.”<ref>{{cite book | last= Schaff | first= Philip | title= The History of the Christian Church | date=1997 | volume= III, Nicene and Post-Nicene Christianity: From Constantine the Great to Gregory the Great | no-tracking= y |orig-date =1910 | edition=Fifth | publisher=Logos Research Systems | place= Oak Harbor| chapter =The Meletian Schism at Antioch| chapter-url =https://ccel.org/ccel/schaff/hcc3.iii.ix.vi.html }}</ref></blockquote>The Eustathians elected as rival bishop the presbyter ]. The ] (362) sent deputies to attempt an arrangement between the two anti-Arian churches; but before they arrived Paulinus had been consecrated bishop by ]. When in consequence of the emperor ]'s contemptuous policy Meletius returned, he found himself as one of three rival bishops.<ref name="EB1911" />
⚫ Meletius died soon after the opening of the ] and the emperor ], who had received him with special distinction, ordered his body to be carried to Antioch and buried with the honours of a saint. The Meletian schism, however, did not end with his death. In spite of the advice of Gregory Nazianzus and of the Western Church, ] was not recognized as the sole bishop and ] was consecrated as Meletius' successor.<ref></ref><ref></ref> The Eustathians, on the other hand, elected ] as bishop on Paulinus' death, and it was not until 415 that they were reunited as one Church. Reconcliation was brought about by , who had been ordained a deacon by Meletius, but later separated from his group without joining in communion with Paulinus, but later accepted ordination to the priesthood at the hands of Paulinus's successor, Evagrius.<ref></ref> After Meletius' death, Chrysostom took further orders from ]. John Chrysostom secured reconciliation between Flavian and the sees of Alexandria and Rome, and the Eustathians at Antioch accepted Flavian.<ref>Philip Hughes, ''History of the Church'' (Sheed and Ward 1934), vol. I, pp. 231-232</ref>


===Second and third exiles===
Meletius ascetic life was remarkable in view of his great private wealth. He is venerated as a saint and confessor in both the Catholic and Orthodox Eastern Churches.
⚫ ] came to Antioch by order of the emperor, and expressed to Meletius his wish of entering into communion with him. Meletius, ill-advised, delayed answering him, and Athanasius went away having admitted Paulinus, whom he had not yet recognized as bishop, to his communion.<ref name=Leclerq/> The orthodox Nicene party, notably Athanasius himself, held communion with Paulinus only. Twice, in 365 and 371 or 372, Meletius was exiled by decree of the Arian emperor ]. A further complication was added when, in 375, ], one of Meletius' presbyters, was consecrated bishop by the heretical bishop ]. After the death of Valens in 378, the Western emperor ] removed Euzoeus from Antioch, handing over the churches to Meletius. ], the new emperor in the East, also favoured Meletius, who had been more and more approximating to the views of the ].<ref name="EB1911"/>


==See also== ===Triumph===
Upon his return to Antioch, Meletius was hailed as the leader of orthodoxy. As such he presided in October 379 over the great ], in which the dogmatic agreement of East and West was established. He helped ] to the see of Constantinople and also presided over the ], the second ecumenical council, in 381.<ref name="EB1911"/> Paulinus, however, was the man favoured by Rome and Alexandria. Jerome accompanied Paulinus back to Rome in order to secure him more support.{{Cn|date=January 2021}}
*]


Meanwhile, ], bishop of Milan, was dealing with Arians in the West. He persuaded Gratian to call a church synod. The ] (381) deposed two bishops of the eastern province of Dacia, ] and ], and requested the emperors Theodosius and Gratian to convene at Alexandria a general council of all bishops in order to put an end to the Meletian schism at Antioch.<ref> Vol. 1. New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1907. 31 January 2019</ref>
==References==

⚫ The two remaining factions which divided the Antiochene Church were orthodox, the supporters of Meletius and the adherents of Paulinus. Uniting them was a difficult move.<ref name=Leclerq> Vol. 10. New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1911. 18 February 2014</ref> A temporary pacification ensued, when six of the leading presbyters took an oath not to seek episcopal consecration themselves but to accept as bishop of Antioch whichever of the two rivals outlived the other.{{Cn|date=January 2021}}

==Schism after his death==
⚫ Meletius died soon after the opening of the First Council of Constantinople and the emperor Theodosius, who had received him with special distinction, ordered his body to be carried to Antioch and buried with the honours of a saint. The Meletian schism, however, did not end immediately with his death. In spite of the advice of Gregory Nazianzus, Paulinus was not recognized as the sole bishop and ] was consecrated as Meletius' successor.<ref></ref><ref></ref>

The Eustathians, on the other hand, elected ] as bishop on Paulinus' death in 388.<ref name="EB1911"/> In 399, John Chrysostom, who had been ordained a deacon by Meletius, but later separated from his group and accepted ordination to the priesthood at the hands of Evagrius,<ref></ref> secured reconciliation between Flavian and the sees of Alexandria and Rome. However, it would take the Eustathians at Antioch until 415 to accept Flavian.<ref>Philip Hughes, ''History of the Church'' (Sheed and Ward 1934), vol. I, pp. 231-232</ref>

==Notes==
{{reflist}} {{reflist}}


==External Links== ==Further reading==
*Cavallera, F. ''Le Schisme de Mélèce''. Paris: Picard, 1906.


==External links==
* *
* *
* *

{{1911}}


{{s-start}} {{s-start}}
Line 38: Line 53:
{{s-aft|after=]}} {{s-aft|after=]}}
{{s-end}} {{s-end}}
{{Patriarchs of Antioch|state=collapsed}}


{{authority control}}


] ]
] ]
] ]
] ]
] ]
] ]
] ]
] ]
] ]
] ]
] ]
]
]
]
]

Revision as of 00:36, 2 November 2024

Christian bishop of Antioch from 360 to 381 "Meletian schism" and "Meletians" redirect here. For the similarly-named schism in Egypt, see Melitians. For its namesake, see Melitius of Lycopolis.
Meletius of Antioch

Saint Meletius (Greek: Μελέτιος, Meletios) was a Christian bishop of Antioch from 360 until his death in 381. However, his episcopate was dominated by a schism, usually called the Meletian schism.

  • During the reigns of the Homoian (Homoean) emperors Constantius and Valens, he was exiled in 361–362, 365–366 and 371–378, implying his opposition to Homoianism.
  • Meletius was also strongly opposed by a rival pro-Nicene bishop named Paulinus who was faithful to the memory of Eustathius of Antioch. "The fragments of Eustathius that survive present a doctrine that is close to Marcellus. ... Eustathius insists there is only one hypostasis." While Athanasius of Alexandria and bishop Damasus of Rome opposed Meletius and supported Paulinus, Basil of Caesarea supported Meletius.

One of Meletius' last acts was to preside over the First Council of Constantinople in 381. He died during that council.

Meletius' asceticism was remarkable in view of his great private wealth. He is venerated as a saint and confessor in the Roman Catholic, Oriental Orthodox and Eastern Orthodox churches. His feast day is 12 February.

Bishop of Sebaste

Meletius was born at Melitene in Lesser Armenia of wealthy and noble parents. He first appears around 357 as a supporter of Acacius, bishop of Caesarea, the leader of that local faction that supported the Homoean formula, which says that the Son is like the Father without reference to essence or substance. In contrast, the Homoiousians held that God and Jesus Christ are of like essence and the Homoousians that they are, as stated in the Nicene Creed, of the same essence. Meletius thus first appears as an ecclesiastic of the court party, and as such became bishop of Sebaste in succession to Eustathius. The appointment was resented by the Homoousian clergy, and Meletius resigned the see.

Bishop of Antioch

First period and exile

According to Socrates Scholasticus, Meletius attended the council of Seleucia in the autumn of 359, and then subscribed to the Acacian (Homoean) formula. Early in 360 he became bishop of Antioch, succeeding Eudoxius, who had been translated to the see of Constantinople. Early the following year (361), he was in exile. According to an old tradition, supported by evidence drawn from Epiphanius of Cyprus and John Chrysostom, this was due to a sermon preached before the emperor Constantius II, in which he revealed Homoousian views. This explanation, however, is rejected by G. F. Loofs on the grounds that the sermon contains nothing inconsistent with the Acacian position favoured by the court party; on the other hand, there is evidence of conflicts with the clergy, quite apart from any questions of orthodoxy, which may have led to the bishop's deposition. Meletius believed that truth lay in delicate distinctions, but his formula was so indefinite that it is difficult to grasp it with precision. He was neither a thorough Nicene nor a decided Arian.

The successor of Meletius was Euzoeus, an Eusebian. In Antioch itself Meletius continued to have adherents, who held separate services in the apostolic church in the old town. The Meletian Schism was a dispute in Antioch between two pro-Nicene groups; the Meletians, who maintained that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are three hypostases, and the older pro-Nicene group, the Eustathians, who taught a single hypostasis. The Eustathians described the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as three prosopa, but Basil of Caesarea objected that the Sabellians also used this term and that it does not make sufficient distinction between the Persons. Basil wrote:

“It is not enough to count differences in the prosōpa. It is necessary also to confess that each prosōpon exists in a true hypostasis. The mirage of prosōpa without hypostaseis is not denied even by Sabellius, who said that the same God, though he is one subject, is transformed according to the need of each occasion and is thus spoken of now as Father, now as Son, and now as Holy Spirit.” (Epistle 210.5.36–41.)

Philip Schaff summarized the Meletian Schism as follows:

“The doctrinal difference between the Meletians and the old Nicenes consisted chiefly in this: that the latter acknowledged three hypostases in the divine trinity, the former only three prosopa; the one laying the stress on the triplicity of the divine essence, the other on its unity.”

The Eustathians elected as rival bishop the presbyter Paulinus. The synod of Alexandria (362) sent deputies to attempt an arrangement between the two anti-Arian churches; but before they arrived Paulinus had been consecrated bishop by Lucifer of Calaris. When in consequence of the emperor Julian's contemptuous policy Meletius returned, he found himself as one of three rival bishops.

Second and third exiles

Athanasius of Alexandria came to Antioch by order of the emperor, and expressed to Meletius his wish of entering into communion with him. Meletius, ill-advised, delayed answering him, and Athanasius went away having admitted Paulinus, whom he had not yet recognized as bishop, to his communion. The orthodox Nicene party, notably Athanasius himself, held communion with Paulinus only. Twice, in 365 and 371 or 372, Meletius was exiled by decree of the Arian emperor Valens. A further complication was added when, in 375, Vitalius, one of Meletius' presbyters, was consecrated bishop by the heretical bishop Apollinaris of Laodicea. After the death of Valens in 378, the Western emperor Gratian removed Euzoeus from Antioch, handing over the churches to Meletius. Theodosius I, the new emperor in the East, also favoured Meletius, who had been more and more approximating to the views of the Nicene Creed.

Triumph

Upon his return to Antioch, Meletius was hailed as the leader of orthodoxy. As such he presided in October 379 over the great synod of Antioch, in which the dogmatic agreement of East and West was established. He helped Gregory Nazianzus to the see of Constantinople and also presided over the First Council of Constantinople, the second ecumenical council, in 381. Paulinus, however, was the man favoured by Rome and Alexandria. Jerome accompanied Paulinus back to Rome in order to secure him more support.

Meanwhile, Ambrose, bishop of Milan, was dealing with Arians in the West. He persuaded Gratian to call a church synod. The Council of Aquileia (381) deposed two bishops of the eastern province of Dacia, Palladius of Ratiaria and Secundianus of Singidunum, and requested the emperors Theodosius and Gratian to convene at Alexandria a general council of all bishops in order to put an end to the Meletian schism at Antioch.

The two remaining factions which divided the Antiochene Church were orthodox, the supporters of Meletius and the adherents of Paulinus. Uniting them was a difficult move. A temporary pacification ensued, when six of the leading presbyters took an oath not to seek episcopal consecration themselves but to accept as bishop of Antioch whichever of the two rivals outlived the other.

Schism after his death

Meletius died soon after the opening of the First Council of Constantinople and the emperor Theodosius, who had received him with special distinction, ordered his body to be carried to Antioch and buried with the honours of a saint. The Meletian schism, however, did not end immediately with his death. In spite of the advice of Gregory Nazianzus, Paulinus was not recognized as the sole bishop and Flavian was consecrated as Meletius' successor.

The Eustathians, on the other hand, elected Evagrius as bishop on Paulinus' death in 388. In 399, John Chrysostom, who had been ordained a deacon by Meletius, but later separated from his group and accepted ordination to the priesthood at the hands of Evagrius, secured reconciliation between Flavian and the sees of Alexandria and Rome. However, it would take the Eustathians at Antioch until 415 to accept Flavian.

Notes

  1. Ayres, Lewis (2004). Nicaea and its Legacy, An Approach to Fourth-Century Trinitarian Theology.
  2. “Paulinus was a rival of Basil's friend and ally Meletius.” (Hanson, p. 801) “Basil would not desert Meletius and Athanasius would not recognize him (Meletius) as bishop of Antioch.” (Hanson, p. 797)
  3. ^  One or more of the preceding sentences incorporates text from a publication now in the public domain: Chisholm, Hugh, ed. (1911). "Meletius of Antioch". Encyclopædia Britannica. Vol. 18 (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press. pp. 93–94.
  4. Cross, F. L.; Livingstone, E. A., eds. (2009) . "Melitius, St". The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church (3rd rev. ed.). Oxford University Press.
  5. ^ Leclercq, Henri. "Meletius of Antioch." The Catholic Encyclopedia Vol. 10. New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1911. 18 February 2014
  6. The traditional term 'Arian' is now recognized to be "a serious misnomer.” (Hanson, p. xvii) “This controversy is mistakenly called Arian.” (Ayres, p. 14) Arius did not leave behind a school of followers. “No clear party sought to preserve Arius' theology.” (Ayres, p. 14)
  7. Schaff, Philip (1997) . "The Meletian Schism at Antioch". The History of the Christian Church. Vol. III, Nicene and Post-Nicene Christianity: From Constantine the Great to Gregory the Great (Fifth ed.). Oak Harbor: Logos Research Systems.
  8. "Councils of Aquileia." The Catholic Encyclopedia Vol. 1. New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1907. 31 January 2019
  9. Socrates Scholasticus, "The Ecclesiastical History" Book V.9
  10. Dictionary of Christian Biography and Literature to the End of the Sixth Century A.D., "Meletius, bishop of Antioch"
  11. Socrates Scholasticus, The Ecclesiastical History, Book VI.3
  12. Philip Hughes, History of the Church (Sheed and Ward 1934), vol. I, pp. 231-232

Further reading

  • Cavallera, F. Le Schisme de Mélèce. Paris: Picard, 1906.

External links

Titles of the Meletian group of Early Christianity
Preceded byEustathius Patriarch of Antioch
361–381
with Paulinus (362–381) 		Succeeded byFlavian I
List of Patriarchs of Antioch
Of the Church of Antioch before 518
Homoian group
Meletian group
Eustathian group
Apollonarist group
  • Vitalis (376–?)
Categories: