§2. The Arian Controversy before Nicæa, 319–325.
At the time when Athanasius first appeared as an
author, the condition of Christian Egypt was not peaceful. Meletius, bishop of Lycopolis, was accused of having sacrificed during the persecution in 301 (pp. 131, 234); condemned by a synod under bishop Peter, he had carried on schismatical intrigues under Peter, Achillas, and Alexander, and by this time had a large following, especially in Upper Egypt. Many cities had Meletian bishops: many of the hermits, and even communities of monks (p. 135), were on his side.
The Meletian account of the matter (preserved by
Epiphan. Hær. 58) was different from this. Meletius had
been in prison along with Peter, and had differed from him on the
question of the lapsed, taking the sterner view, in which most of the
imprisoned clergy supported him. It would not be without a parallel
(. art. ) in the history of the burning question of the
lapsi to suppose that Meletius recoiled from a compromised position to the advocacy of impossible strictness. At any rate (de Incarn. 24. 4) the Egyptian Church was rent by a formidable schism. No doctrinal question, however, was involved. The alliance of Meletians and Arians belongs to a later date.
It is doubtful whether the outbreak of the Arian
controversy at Alexandria was directly connected with the previous
Christological controversies in the same Church. The great Dionysius
some half-century before had been involved in controversy with members
of his Church both in Alexandria and in the suffragan dioceses of Libya
(infr. p. 173). Of the sequel of that controversy we have no
direct knowledge: but we find several bishops and numerous clergy and
laity in Alexandria and Libya ready to side with Arius
against his bishop.