Scanned text contains errors.
OyTfiplav, De Obedientia Sensuum Fidei praestanda s. De Obedientia Sensuum Fidei. Nicephorus Callisti speaks of two works, flepl viraKoijs TriVrewy, and .Hep? aurflrjTTjpiW ; and'Jerome, in his catalogue of the works of Melito, enumerates consecutively De Sensibus and De Fide, which Sophronius renders Ilepi fiiavoias and Ilepl rtav itktt&v. Rufinus also gives two titles as of separate books, De Obedientia Fidei and De Sensibus, which two titles represent the one title given in the present text of Eusebius. 8. Ilepl tyvxns Kal o-w/j.o.tos % voos, De Anima et Corpore seu de Mente: or, as Rufinus renders it, De Anima et Corpore et Mente. Jerome has only De Anima et Corpore. 9. Ilepl \ovrpov, De Baptismate s. De Lavacro. One MS. of Eusebius, supported by Nicephorus Callisti, speaks of this work as a portion of No. 8. 10. Hep? dkriQeia?, De Veritate. 11. Ilepl Kriffecas Kal yeveffecas Xptcr-rov, De Creatione et Generatione Christi. Some MSS. read irtffreces instead of /mVews; but this reading was probably introduced after the rise of the Arian controversy caused the word Kriffecas to be regarded as heterodox. Rufinus has De Fide (as if he had read Ilepi TriVrews instead of Ilept KT/Vecos) and De Generatione Christi as the titles of two separate books. Jerome has only De Generatione Christi, omitting to render the obnoxious word KTlffsws. 12. Hep! Trpo^Tjreias, De Prophetia. Jerome renders the title De Prophetia sua. Rufinus, who has De Proplietia ejus, connects this title by the conjunction et with the title of the latter work mentioned under No. 11, De Generatione Christi et de Prophetia ejus. It may be mentioned, in vindication of Jerome's version, that according to the testimony of Tertullian (in a work now lost, but which Jerome (I. c.) cites, and which was written after he became a Montanist), Melito was regarded by many persons (whether among the Montanists or the Catholics, is not clear) as a prophet. 13. Ilepi <]>i\o£ei>ias, De Philoxenia s. De Hospitalitate. 14. 'H /cAe/s, Clams; of which we shall speak presently. 15. flepl tov fiia.€6\ov Kal rtfs dnotcaXvtyews 'Iwcfwou, De Diabolo et de Apocalypsi Joannis. Both Rufinus and Jerome speak of two books, one De Diabolo, the other De Apocalypsi; they are perhaps right. 16. Ilepi eftrcwjuaTOu ©ecv, De Deo Corpore induto. From a passage in Origen, quoted by Theodoret (Quaest. in Genesim, c. 20), Melito appears to have believed that God possessed a bodily form, and to have written in support of that doctrine. This work was probably the one referred to by Origen ; and it is in vain that some modern critics have argued that it was written on the incarnation of Christ. Anastasius Sinaita, in his *O5r?7os, Dux Viae adversus Acephalos, c. 13, has, indeed, quoted a passage from Melito's book, Tlepl ffapKuffews XpicTTov, De Incarnatione Christi, but this appears:to be a different work from the present, and is not mentioned by Eusebius. 17. ,1'Ipos 'avtodvwov Bt§Ai'5fOJ/, Libellus (sc. suppleoc]
' r 7 \ l Jt /
ad Antoninum, This was the Apologia or defence of Christianity already mentioned. 18. *EK\oyai, Eclogae, sc. ex Libris Vet. Testamenli, comprised, ,according to Jerome, in six books. This last work is not mentioned by Eusebius when enumerating the works of Melito, but he afterwards gives a quotation from it. (Euseb. H. E. iv. 26.) To this catalogue, furnished by Eusebius, we may • add the following works on the authority of Anastasius Sinaita, who lived in the middle of the.
sixth century. 19. Ilepi o-apKooffews Xptorow Incarnatione Christi, consisting of at least three books, and directed, partly or wholly, against Marcion. (See above, No. 16.) 20. Aoyos els T(> irddos, Oratio in Passionem. Besides these genuine writings of Melito, another has been ascribed to him, De Transitu Beatae Virginis, which is extant in Latin, and appears in most editions of the Bibliotheca Patrum, but it is generally allowed to be spurious. It is mentioned, but without the author's name, in the Decretum of Pope Gelasius I., in which it is placed among the spurious books; and is mentioned as extant, under the name of Melito, by the venerable Beda (Re-tractat. in Acta, cap. 8, Opera, vol. vi. col. 15, ed. Col. 1612), who describes it as a forgery, and points out its inconsistencies with the Scripture narratives.
The number of his genuine works sufficiently shows the industry of Melito, and their subjects indicate the variety of his attainments ; and the eulogies of the most learned fathers, and their testimony of the high reputation which Melito enjoyed, make us regret that of all these writings only a few fragments have descended to our times. It is, however, to be observed that these eulogies are qualified by intimations of his gross error as to the Deity. The express declaration of Origen as to his belief that God had a bodily form is supported by the testimony of Gennadius of Massilia (Lib. Dogm. Eccles. c. 4). Modern writers seek in vain to exculpate him ; and Tillemont, though unwilling to conclude positively that a writer so eminent could have held so gross an error, admits that, possibly, this imputation, or the ascription to him of the bookZte Transitu B. Virginis, may have prevented the church from honouring his memory by an appointed office. Modern Roman Catholics, as Bellarmin, Barbnius, Halloix, Tillemont, Ceil-Her, &c., do not hesitate to give him the title oi "Saint," and Tillemont pleads that they are in this only following the tradition of the Asiatic church.
The book published in French (12-mo. 1662), under the title of Apocalypse de Meliton,' was a satire against the monks.
The fragments of Melito's writings are as follows. We prefix to the notice of each the number of the work, from which it is taken, in the catalogue of the works of this father already given. 1. A fragment of the work De Pascha, preserved by Eusebius (H. E. iv. 26), showing when Melito wrote it. 17. Several fragments of the Apologia, all but one, preserved by Eusebius (I.e.), and the remaining one in the Chronicon Paschale (p. 259, ed. Paris, 207, ed. Venice, and vol. i. p. 483, ed. Bonn). 18. A very valuable passage preserved by Eusebius (I.e.) from the Eclogae, or rather from the introductory letter to the Eclogae addressed to " Onesimus, my brother" (whether his natural brother, or simply a fellow-Christian, is not clear), containing the earliest catalogue of " the books of the Old Covenant (or Testament)," given by a Christian writer. His catalogue agrees with the received canon of the Qld Testament, except that it omits the books of Nehemiah and Esther ; but Nehemiah is perhaps included under the title Esra or Esdras. None of the books of the Apocrypha are mentioned: the book of Wisdom has been thought to be .included, but, according to the testimony of several ancient MSS. of Eusebius, supported by Rufinus and Nicephorus Callisti, the