II. WORKS.
(1.) By Rom. Cath. MADRISI (Congreg. Orat.) : Dissertationes de Felicis et Elipandi hceresi, in his ed. of the Opera Paulini Aquil., reprinted in Migne's "Patrol. Lat.," vol. 90 (col. 545-598). Against Basnage. ENHUEBER (Prior in Regensburg) : Dissert, dogm. hist, contra Christ. Walchium, in Alcuin's Opera, ed. Frobenius, reprinted by Migne (vol. 101, col. 337-438). Against Walch's Hist. Adopt., to prove the Nestorianism of the Adoptionists. FROBENIUS : Diss. hist, de hcer. Elip. et Felicis, in Migne's ed., vol. 101, col. 303-336. WERNER: Gesch. der apol. und polem. Lit. II. 433 sqq. GAMS : Kirchengesch. Spaniens (Regensb., 1874), Bd. II. 2. (Very prolix.) HEFELE: Conciliengesch., Bd. III. 642-693 (revised ed. of 1877). HERGENRO- THER: Kirchengesch., 2nd ed., 1879, Bd. I. 558 sqq. BACH: Dogmengesch. des Mittelalters (Wien, 1873), I. 103-155.
(2.) By Protestants. JAC. BASNAGE : Observationes historicce circa Fellcianam hceresin, in his Thesaurus monum. Tom. II. 284 sqq. CHR. G. F. WALCH : Historia Adoptianorum, Gottingen, 1755 ; and his Ketzergeschichte, vol. IX. 667 sqq. (1780). A minute and accurate account. See also the lit. quoted by Walch.
NEANDER, Kirchengeschichte, vol. III., pp. 313-339, Engl. transl. III. 156- 168. GIESELER, vol. II., P. I., p. Ill sqq.; Eng. transl. II. 75-78. BAUR: Die christliche Lehre von der DreieinigJceit und Menschwerdung Gottes, Tubingen, 1842, vol. II., pp. 129-159. DORNER : Entwicblungs-Geschichte der Lehre von der Person Christi, second ed., Berlin, 1853, vol. II., pp. 306-330. HELFFERICH : Der Westgothische Ariinismus und die spanische Ketzergeschichte, Berlin, 1880. NIEDNER: Lehrbuch der christl K. G., Berlin, 1866, pp. 424-427. J. C. ROBERT SON: History of the Christian Church from 590 to 1122 (Lond., 1856),
2 117. HISTORY OF ADOPT1ONISM. 513
p. 154 sqq. MILMAN : Lat. Christ. II. 498-500 ; BAUDISSIN : Eulogius und Alvar, Lcipz., 1872. SCHAFF, in Smith and Wace, I. (1877), pp. 44-47. W. HOLLER, in Herzog8 1. 151-159.
§ 117. History of Adoptionism.
The Adoptionist controversy is a revival of the Nestorian controversy in a modified form, and turns on the question whe ther Christ, as to his human nature, was the Son of God in essence, or only by adoption. Those who took the latter view were called Adoptionists.1 They taught that Christ as to his divinity is the true Sou2 of God, the Only-Begotten of the Father ; but as man he is his adopted Son,3 the First-Born of Mary. They accepted the Chalcedouian Christology of one person and two natures, but by distinguishing a natural Son of God and an adopted Son of God, they seemed to teach two per sons or a double Christ, and thus to run into the Nestorian heresy.
The orthodox opponents held that Christ was the one undi vided and indivisible Son of God ; that the Virgin Mary gave birth to the eternal Son of God, and is for this reason called "the mother of God;" that sonship is founded on the person, not on the nature ; and that Adoptionism leads to two Christs and to four persons in the Trinity.
Both parties displayed a degree of patristic learning which one would hardly expect in this period of the middle ages.
The history of this movement is confined to the West (Spain and Gaul); while all the older Christological controversies ori ginated 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
1 Adoptiani, Adoptivi ; in English Adoptianists or Adoptionists (from adoptio).
a Filins proprius or verus.
3 filius adoptivus or nuncupativus.
514 FOUETH PERIOD. A.D. 590-1049.
nature, not by adoption.1 But about a century afterwards ELIPANDUS, the aged Archbishop of Toledo, and primate of that part of Spain which was under Mohammedan rule, endea vored 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 na ture. 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;2 but the conflict of the two religions was too strong to admit of any compromise. He may have read Nestorian writings.3 At all events, he came to simi lar conclusions.
Having little confidence in his own opinions, Elipandus con sulted FELIX, bishop of Urgel4 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
1 " Hie etiam Filius Dei natura est Filius, non adoptione."
2 So Baronius, Gfrorer, 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.
3 So Neander and Jacobi; see his ed. of Neander's Dogmengesch. II. 26 sqq. Jacobi tries to show a connection of Adoptionism with the writings of Theodor of Mopsueste. Gams (Kirchenqesch. Spaniens, II. 2, p. 261 sqq.) conjectures that some Eastern Nestorian* settled in Spain under Moslem rule, and sug gested the Adoptionist theory. Hefele (III. 646) and Moller (Herzog2 1. 159) are inclined to the same view. Enhueber, Walch, and Bach hold that Eli pandus was led to his view by opposition to Migetius, who made no distinc tion 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 Hen rique Florez, EspaHa sagrada, T. V. 543 sq., and Hefele, /. c. III. 629-635 and 657.
4 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.