The history of this movement is confined to the West (Spain and Gaul); while all the older
Christological controversies originated and were mainly carried on and settled in the East. It arose
in the Saracen dominion of Spain, where the Catholics had to defend the eternal and essential
Sonship of Christ against the objections both of the Arians and the Mohammedans.
The Council of Toledo, held in 675, declared in the preface to the Confession of Faith, that
Christ is the Son of God by, nature, not by adoption.^647 But about a century afterwards Elipandus,
the aged Archbishop of Toledo, and primate of that part of Spain which was under Mohammedan
rule, endeavored to modify the orthodox doctrine by drawing a distinction between a natural and
an adopted sonship of Christ, and by ascribing the former to his divine, the latter to his human
nature. He wished to save the full humanity of Christ, without, however, denying his eternal divinity.
Some historians assert that he was influenced by a desire to avoid the Mohammedan objection to
the divinity of Christ;^648 but the conflict of the two religions was too strong to admit of any
compromise. He may have read Nestorian writings.^649 At all events, he came to similar conclusions.
Having little confidence in his own opinions, Elipandus consulted Felix, bishop of Urgel^650
in Catalonia, in that part of Spain which, since 778, was incorporated with the dominion of
Charlemagne. Felix was more learned and clear-headed than Elipandus, and esteemed, even by his
antagonist Alcuin, for his ability and piety. Neander regards him as the originator of Adoptionism;
at all events, he reduced it to a formulated statement.
Confirmed by his friend, Elipandus taught the new doctrine with all the zeal of a young
convert, although he was already eighty years of age; and, taking advantage of his influential
position, he attacked the orthodox opponents with overbearing violence. Etherius, Bishop of Osma
or Othma (formerly his pupil), and Beatus, a presbyter, and after Alcuin abbot at Libana in Asturia,^651
took the lead in the defence of the old and the exposure of the new Christology. Elipandus charged
them with confounding the natures of Christ, like wine and water, and with scandalous immorality,
and pronounced the anathema on them.
Pope Hadrian, being informed of these troubles, issued a letter in 785 to the orthodox bishops
of Spain, warning them against the new doctrine as rank Nestorianism.^652 But the letter had no
(^647) "Hic etiam Filius Dei natura est Filius, non adoptione."
(^648) So Baronius, Gfrörer, Baudissin; but Hefele (III. 649) objects to this for the reason that the Adoptionists very strongly
asserted the Trinity and the divinity of Christ, which were so offensive to the Mohammedans.
(^649) So Neander and Jacobi; see his ed. of Neander’sDogmengesch. II. 26 sqq. Jacobi tries to show a connection of
Adoptionism with the writings of Theodor of Mopsueste. Gams (Kirchengesch. Spaniens, II. 2, p. 261 sqq.) conjectures that
some Eastern Nestorians settled in Spain under Moslem rule, and suggested the Adoptionist theory. Hefele (III. 646) and Möller
(Herzog 2 I. 159) are inclined to the same view. Enhueber, Walch, and Bach hold that Elipandus was led to his view by opposition
to Migetius, who made no distinction between the Logos and Christ, as if the second person of the Trinity had not existed before
the incarnation.—The reports on Migetius are vague. Elipandus charged him with teaching three corporeal persons in the Trinity
who became incarnate in David (the Father), in Jesus (the Son), and in Paul (the Holy Spirit). He probably fell into the error of
the Priscillianists, which was confounded with Sabellianism (hence his name magister Salibanorum, which is a corruption for
Sabellianorum). See on this mysterious phenomenon Henrique Florez, España sagrada, T. V. 543 sq., and Hefele, l.c. III.
629-635 and 657.
(^650) Urgelis, Urgela, Orgellis, in the Marca Hispanica. It formerly belonged to the metropolis of Tarracona, but since the
middle of the eighth century, to the province of Narbonne.
(^651) He is still honored in Spain as San Biego, but Elipandus called him a disciple of Antichrist,"heretical, schismatical,
ignorant, and devoted to carnal lusts, and the very opposite of what his name Beatus (Blessed) would suggest.
(^652) Hadrian is also reported to have written to Charlemagne, and called the Synod of Narbonne, 788; but the acts of this
Synod (first published by Cattell, 1633) are rejected as spurious by Pagi, Walch, and Hefele (III. 662 sq. ).