[2] Neander (l.l.) Blunt, Art. on Adopt., puts this differently: "There were (according to Felix) two births in our Lord's life--(a) the assumption of man at the conception; (_b_) the adoption of that man at baptism. Cp. Contra Felic., iii. 16: "Qui est Secundus Adam, accepit has geminas generationes; primam quae secundum carnem est, secundum vero spiritatem, quae per adoptionem fit, idem redemptor noster secundum hominem complexus, in semet ipso continet, primam videlicet, quam suscepit ex virgine nascendo, secundam vero quam initiavit in lavacro [ ] a mortuis resurgendo." [3] Blunt, article on Adopt. [4] Cp. Paschasius: "In Christo gemina substantia, non gemina persona est, quia persona personam consumere potest, substantia vero substantiam non potest, siquidem persona res iuris est, substantia res naturae." [5] Blunt, _ibid._ Cp. also Alcuin contra Felic., iv. 5, where he says that Felix, although he shrank from asserting the dual personality of Christ, yet insisted on points which involved it. [6] So Walchius. The first mention of the new theory appears in a letter of Elipandus to the Abbot Fidelis, written in 783,[1] but it did not attract notice till a little later. The pope Adrian, in his letter to the orthodox bishops of Spain (785), speaks of the melancholy news of the heresy having reached him--a heresy, he remarks, never before propounded, unless by Nestorius. Together with Elipandus, he mentions Ascarius,[2] Bishop of Braga, whom Elipandus had won over to his views. The new doctrine seems to have made its way quickly over a great part of Spain,[3] while Felix propagated it with considerable success in Septimania. The champions of the orthodox party in Spain were Beatus and Etherius, whom we have mentioned above, and Theudula, Bishop of Seville; while beyond its borders Alcuin, Paulinus of Aquileia, and Agobard of Lyons, under the direction of Charles the Great and the Pope, defended the orthodox position. [1] See Migne, 96 p. 848. [2] Fleury, v. 236, mentions a letter of his to Elipandus, asking the latter's opinion on some doubtful points in the new doctrine. [3] Jonas of Orleans, in his work against Claudius, says: "Hac virulenta doctrina uterque Hispaniam magna ex parte infecit."