Alcuin of York : $b Lectures delivered in the cathedral church of Bristol in 1907 and 1908Browne, G. F. (George Forrest)
Religion
Alcuin of York : $b Lectures delivered in the cathedral church of Bristol in 1907 and 1908
Browne, G. F. (George Forrest)
Alcuin, 735-804
It was to this tendency to inquire into and seek to fathom divine
mysteries that the controversy about transubstantiation was due. That
controversy came into being a full generation after the death of
Alcuin; and one of the most prominent opponents of any approach to a
materialistic view of the manner of the Real Presence was a pupil of
Alcuin’s, Rabanus Maurus, Archbishop of Mainz.
The heresy which reached such dimensions as to call Alcuin back from
England to France was the heresy known as Adoptionism. It became
prominent in the same manner, from the same tendency to pry into the
divine secrets of operation, as did the theory of transubstantiation. The
point was, how exactly did the human nature of the Son come into union
with the divine nature? The answer given by Felix, Bishop of Urgel in
Catalonia, was this—by adoption. Hence he and his followers were called
Adoptionists.
The term Adoption had been applied to the Incarnation by some early
Fathers, and indeed in the Spanish Liturgy, which Felix naturally used.
It was used probably as equivalent to assumption—He took upon Him—that
is, assumed—our flesh. This use of the word Adoption in their liturgy
led Felix and his followers to take a large step beyond the equivalence
to assumption. They carried it to its full meaning in ordinary affairs,
and declared that the divine nature of the Second Person of the Trinity
adopted the human nature into sonship, as Son. The so-called Athanasian
Creed has in our English form, “by taking the manhood into God.” In the
original Latin the word “assumption” is used, _assumptione humanitatis in
Deum_.[167]
Catalonia was at that time a part of Karl’s dominions, and therefore he
could operate upon Felix. But Elipandus, who supported Felix, was bishop
of Toledo and primate of Spain under the Mohammedan dominion, and thus
was beyond the reach of Karl. He was a man who, in his letters at least,
used very abusive language.
The Adoptionists held that it was a confusion of the two natures in
Christ to say that Christ was proper and real Son of God not only in his
Godhead but in His whole Person. The highest that could befall humanity,
they maintained, was to be adopted into sonship with God; therefore
Christ’s humanity is adopted into sonship. This adoption had three stages
they said; the first at the moment of conception, the second at His
baptism, the final stage at His resurrection. The Adoptionists professed
to deny that they were Nestorians, that is, that they divided Christ into
two Persons; but it was urged against them that if they did not divide
Christ into two persons, their theory did, when it was pressed to its
necessary consequence. That is the history of the origin of many of the
heresies.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account