There is considerable doubt as to who first broached the new theory, the evidence being of a conflicting character, and pointing now to Elipandus, bishop of Toledo and primate of all Spain, now to Felix, bishop of Urgel, in Catalonia.[6]

[1] Mariana, vii. 8.  Baronius, “Ann.  Eccl.” xiii. p. 260.  See Blunt, “Dictionary of Religions,” etc., article on Adoptionism; and Migne, vol. xcvi. p. 847—­“deceptus uterque contagione forsan insidentiurn cervicibus aut e proximo blasphemantium Mohametanorum commercio.”

    [2] Enhueber, sec. 26.  Mansi, “Coll.  Concil,” x. 513, sec. 4.

    [3] “Usus enim frequenti Maurorum commercio.”—­Ibid.

    [4] V. 219.

[5] This perhaps refers to a “disputatio cum sacerdote” which the Emperor Charles the Great had heard of as written by Felix.  Alcuin (see “Ep.,” 85) knows nothing of it.  In his letter to Charles, Alcuin, speaking of a letter from Felix, says:  “Inveni peiores errores, quam ante in eius scriptis legerem.”

    [6] The prevailing opinion seems to be that the new doctrine
    arose out of Elipandus’ controversy with Migetius.

The claims of Felix[1] are supported by Eginhard,[2] Saxo, and Jonas of Orleans; while Paulinus of Aquileia, in his book entitled “Sacrosyllabus,” expressly calls Elipandus the author of the baneful heresy; and Alcuin, in his letter to Leidrad,[3] says that he is convinced that Elipandus, as he was the first in rank, so also was the chief offender.

The evidence being inconclusive, we are driven to follow a priori considerations, and these point to Elipandus as the author.  According to Neander,[4] he was a violent, excitable, bigoted man; and he certainly uses some very strong language in his writings against his opponents, and stands a good deal on his dignity as head of the Spanish Church.  For instance, speaking of his accusers, Etherius, Bishop of Osma, and Beatus,[5] a priest of Libana, he says of the former that he wallows in the mire of all lasciviousness;[6] that he is totally unfit to officiate at God’s altar;[7] that he is a false prophet[8] and a heretic; and, forgetting the courtesies of controversy, he doesn’t hesitate, in another place, to call him an ass.  Beatus also he accuses of gross sensuality, and calls him that iniquitous priest of Astorga,[9] accusing him of heresy, and giving him the title Antiphrasius, which means that instead of being called Beatus, he should have been named the very opposite.[10]

    [1] See “Froben Dissertation,” Migne, vol. ci. p. 305.

    [2] “Annals,” 792.

    [3] Alcuin, “Epist. ad Leidradum,” says that the heresy arose
    in Cordova, and he appeals to Elipandus’ letter to Felix after
    the latter’s recantation.

[4] Neander (v. p. 217) seems to infer these qualities from his writings.  An author, quoted by Enhueber (Tract, de Primata Eccl.  Tolet), describes him as “parum accurate in sacris litteris versatus.”

    [5] Died in 798.  Fleury v., p. 236.