Difference between revisions of "Monothelitism" - New World Encyclopedia

From New World Encyclopedia
 
(54 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
−
{{portal|Christianity}}
+
{{Images OK}}{{submitted}}{{approved}}{{copyedited}}
−
'''Monothelitism''' (a Greek [[loanword]] meaning "one will") is a particular teaching about how the divine and human relate in the person of [[Jesus]], known as a [[Christological]] doctrine, that began in [[Armenia]] and Syria in AD 633. Specifically, Monothelitism teaches that Jesus [[Christ]] had two natures but only one will. This is contrary to the orthodox interpretation of [[Christology]], which teaches that Jesus Christ has two wills (human and divine) corresponding to his two natures. Monothelitism is a development of the [[Monophysite]] position in the Christological debates. It enjoyed considerable support in the 7th century before being rejected as heretical.
+
[[Image:Christ in Gethsemane.jpg|thumb|250px|Christ in [[Gethsemane]]: Was [[Jesus]]' human will distinct from the will of [[God]]?]]
 +
'''Monothelitism''' (from the [[Greek]], referring to "one will") was a theological doctrine and movement influential in the seventh century C.E. Its teaching was that [[Christ]]'s human will was at all times completely one with the will of [[God]].
  
−
==Historical overview==
+
An outgrowth of the [[Monophysitism|Monophysite controversy]] from the previous two centuries, Monothelitism held that while Christ had two natures (both human and divine), he had only one will (divine/human), which is not distinguishable from the will of God. Simultaneously the orthodox view holds that [[Jesus]] had both a [[human being|human]] will and a [[divine]] will.  
−
Monothelitism grew out of the [[Christology|christological]] controversies dealing with the question of whether Christ had one nature (divine/human) or two (divine and human). In these bitter and contentious debates, which often divided the eastern and western Christian churches, the Nestorians had emphasized two distinct natures in Christ, the Monophysites had insisted on one nature in which Christ's humanity were harmonized, and the Orthodox party ultimately prevailed with a formula which upheld the idea of "two natures" but rejected the Nestorian principle of considering the natures to be distinct from one another. The definition of [[Council of Chalcedon]] thus states that Jesus was one person with two natures but that these two natures are "without distinction or confusion."
 
  
−
In the short run, however, this formula proved inadequate to solve the problem, being considered far too "Nestorian" for many Monophysite churchmen. The churches, especially in the East, remained divided and various formulas were attempted by the eastern Emperors to reconcile with the Monophysites, resulting more often than not in even more division, especially with the West under the leadership of the papacy.
+
Evidence indicates that resulting from the suggestion of Emperor [[Heraclius]] (610–641), the Monothelite position was promulgated by [[Patriarch Sergius I of Constantinople]]. This succeeded for a time in reconciling the Monophysite churches of the East and Africa with the [[Council of Chalcedon]]. In its early stages, the idea was either endorsed or tolerated by [[Pope Honorius I]] (625–638). After Honorius' death, however, Monothelitism was strongly opposed by succeeding [[popes]]. In the East, it was supported by several emperors and leading Christian patriarchs, resulting in a bitterly contested [[schism]], giving rise to the [[martyr]]dom of the orthodox figures [[Pope Martin I]] and Saint [[Maximus the Confessor]], among others.
 +
{{toc}}
 +
Monothelitism was finally condemned at the [[Third Council of Constantinople]] (the Sixth [[Ecumenical Council]] (680–681), which also declared Honorius I to be a heretic. It came to an end only after the last Monothelite Emperor, [[Philippicus Bardanes]], was removed from power in the early eighth century C.E.
  
−
The '''Monothelite''' teaching emerged as another compromise position, in which the former Monophysites might agree that Jesus had two natures if it were also affirmed that his will was completely united with that of God, while some [[Council of Chalcedon|Chalcedonian]] Christians might agree that Jesus' will was always united with the will of God as long as it was affirmed that Christ also had two natures.
+
==Background==
 +
[[Image:Meister von San Vitale in Ravenna 004.jpg|thumb|[[Justinian I]] was one of several emperors who had tried unsuccessfully to reconcile the [[Monophysite]]s and "orthodox" Christians.]]
 +
Monothelitism grew out of the [[Christology|christological]] controversies dealing with the question of whether Christ had one nature (divine/human) or two (divine and human). In these bitter and contentious debates, which often divided the eastern and western Christian churches, the [[nestorianism|Nestorians]] had emphasized two distinct natures in Christ, the [[Monophysite]]s had insisted on one nature in which Christ's divinity and humanity were fully harmonized, and the "Orthodox" ultimately prevailed with a formula which upheld the idea of "two natures" but rejected the notion that these natures were in any way distinct from one another. The definition of the [[Council of Chalcedon]] thus states that Jesus was one person with two natures and that these two natures are "without distinction or confusion."
  
−
Perhaps at the suggestion of Emperor [[Heraclius]] (610–641), the Monothelite position was promulgated by [[Patriarch Sergius I of Constantinople]] (patriarch 610–638).<ref>''Westminster Dictionary of Church History''. ed,&nbsp;J. C. Brauer. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1971. p. 568–569</ref> The Monothelite position gained favor in the Church for a time, and spread under [[Pope Honorius I]] (reigned 625–638).
+
In the short run, however, this formula proved inadequate to solve the problem, being considered far too "Nestorian" for Monophysite churchmen. Many churches, especially in the East and Africa, remained Monophysite, and various formulas were attempted by the eastern Emperors to reconcile the opposing factions, resulting more often than not in even more division and bitter feuds between [[Constantinople]] and the Roman [[papacy]].
  
−
Monothelitism was officially condemned at the [[Third Council of Constantinople]] (the Sixth [[Ecumenical Council]], 680–681). The churches condemned at Constantinople include the [[Oriental Orthodox]] churches and the [[Maronite]] church, although they now deny that they ever held the Monothelite view, describing their own Christology as [[Miaphysite]].  
+
Monothelitism emerged as another compromise position, in which the former Monophysites might agree that [[Jesus]] had two natures if it were also affirmed that his will was completely united with that of God. It was also hoped that [[Council of Chalcedon|Chalcedonian]] Christians might agree that Jesus' will was always united with the will of God, as long as it was also affirmed that Christ also had two natures.
 +
 
 +
The terminology of the Monothelite controversy is highly technical, causing even one pope, Honorius, to stumble into this "[[heresy]]." At stake was the question as to whether Jesus was truly "human," for if his will was always that of God, how could he share in people's humanity or be truly tempted by [[Satan]], as the Bible reports he was? Moreover, if Jesus had only one (completely divine, yet also human) will, how can one explain his agony in the [[Garden of Gethsemane]], when he himself appears to make a distinction between his will and that of God? Monothelytes sometimes dealt with this objection with reference to "one operation" of Christ's will, meaning his will always operated in union with God's will, even though, as a human being he might be tempted to act otherwise.
  
 
==Details==
 
==Details==
−
Though not a trained theologian, Patriarch Sergius of Constantinople, as the bishop of the capital city of the Eastern Roman Empire, held authority in the Christian churches rivaled only by that of the bishop of Rome. in a letter to Pope Honorius, Segius wrote that [[Emperor Heraclius]] came to Theodosiopolis (Erzeroum) in Armenia about 622 on a military matter. While there, a Monophysite leadernamed Paul made a speech before him in support of the Monophysite position, in which the emperor refuted the idea of one "nature" in Christ but admitted "one operation" in term of his will. Later on he inquired of  Bishop Cyrus of Phasis whether his words were correct. Cyrus was uncertain, and at the emperor's order, wrote to Sergius in Constantinople, whom Heraclius greatly trusted, for advice. Sergius in reply sent him a letter in which several authorities were cited, including the late [[Pope Vigilius]], for "one operation" and "one will."  In June, 631, Cyrus was promoted by the emperor to the position of patriarch Alexandria.
+
[[Image:Sophronius of Jerusalem.jpg|thumb|120px|Saint [[Sophrinius]] of Jerusalem led the early opposition to Monothelitism]]
 +
[[Image:Heraclius-coin2.jpg|thumb|300px|left|Coin bearing the image of [[Emperor Heraclius]]]]
  
−
Practically the whole of Egypt was at this time still Monophysite. Former emperors had made efforts for reunion, to little success. In the fifth century the compromise document known as the [[Henotikon]] of Emperor Zeno had resulted in the so-called [[Acacian schism]] between Rome and Constantinople and yet was rejected by many Monophysites, as well as the popes. In the sixth century, the condemnation of the [[Three Chapters]] had nearly caused a another schism between East and West without in the least placating the Monophysites.
+
Though not a trained theologian, Patriarch [[Sergius I of Constantinople]], as the [[bishop]] of the capital city of the [[Byzantine Empire]], held a position of authority among the Christian churches rivaled only by that of the [[bishop of Rome]]. Sergius wrote that [[Emperor Heraclius]] came to Armenia about 622 during a military campaign, where he disputed with a Monophysite leader named Paul, refuting his claims by arguing for two "natures" in Christ but admitting "one operation" in terms of Christ's will. Later on, the emperor inquired of Bishop [[Cyrus of Alexandria|Cyrus of Phasis]] whether his words were correct. Cyrus was uncertain, and at the emperor's order, he wrote to Sergius in Constantinople, whom Heraclius greatly trusted, for advice. Sergius in reply sent him a letter citing several authorities, including the late [[Pope Vigilius]], in support of "one operation" and "one will." In June, 631, Cyrus was promoted by the emperor to the important position of patriarch of [[Alexandria]].
  
−
In Alexandria, Cyrus was for the moment more successful. He obtained the acceptance by the Monophysites of a series of nine theological points, in which Christ's "one operation" of will was asserted along with the Chalcedonian "two natures" and "one composite [[hypostasis]] (person)."  He thus effected the reunion of the Alexandrian church and nearly all of Egypt and northern Africa.
+
Practically the whole of Egypt was at this time still [[Monophysite]]. Former emperors had made efforts toward reunion, to little success. In the late fifth century, the compromise document known as the [[Henotikon]] of Emperor [[Zeno]] had resulted in the so-called [[Acacian schism]] between [[Rome]] and [[Constantinople]] and yet was rejected by many Monophysites, as well as the [[pope]]s. In the sixth century, [[Justinian I]]'s condemnation of the allegedly Nestorian [[Three Chapters]] had nearly caused a another schism between East and West without in the least placating the Monophysites.
  
−
However, Saint Sophronius, a much venerated monk of Palestine, soon to become patriarch of Jerusalem who was in Alexandria at this time, strongly objected to the expression "one operation." He went to Constantinople, and urged Patriarch Sergius to the seventh of the nine "chapters" promoted by Cyrus withdrawn. Sergius was not willing to risk losing the African churches again by ordering this, but he did write to Cyrus that it would be well for the future to drop both expressions "one operation" and "two operations." He also advised referrin the question to the pope. Cyrus politely responded that Sergius was, in effect, declaring the emperor to be wrong.
+
In Alexandria, Cyrus was for the moment more successful. He obtained the acceptance by the Monophysites of a series of nine theological points, in which Christ's "one operation" of divine/human will was asserted along with the Chalcedonian "two natures" and "one composite (divine/human) [[hypostasis]] (person)." Through this formula, Cyrus effected the reunion of the Alexandrian church and nearly all of the Egyptian and northern African churches as well.
  
−
In the letter to Pope Honorius, Sergius admitted that "one operation," though used by a few of the orthodox [[Church Fathers]], is a strange expression, and might suggest a denial of the "unconfused union of two natures." But, he said, the idea of "two operations" is also dangerous, suggesting "two contrary wills, as though when the Word of God wished to fulfill His saving Passion, His humanity resisted and contradicted His will, and thus two contrary wills would be introduced, which is impious, for it is impossible that in the same subject there should be two wills at once, and contrary to one another as to the same thing."
+
However, the future Saint [[Sophronius]]—a much venerated [[monk]] of [[Palestine]], soon to become patriarch of Jerusalem, who was in Alexandria at this time—strongly objected to the expression "one operation." He thus went to [[Constantinople]] and urged Patriarch Sergius that the seventh of the nine "chapters" promoted by Cyrus, affirming "one operation," must be withdrawn. Sergius was not willing to risk losing the African churches again by ordering this, but he did write to Cyrus that it would be well in the future to drop both the expressions "one operation" and "two operations." He also advised referring the question to the [[pope]]. Cyrus, who had much to lose by dropping the idea of "one operation," politely responded that Sergius was, in effect, declaring the emperor to be wrong.
  
−
He concludes that it is best simply to confess that "the only begotten Son of God, who is truly both God and Man, works both the Divine and the human works, and from one and the same incarnate Word of God proceed indivisibly and inseparably both the Divine and the human operations."
+
===Honorius endorses 'one Will'===
 +
[[Image:Onorio I - mosaico Santa Agnese fuori le mura.jpg|thumb|[[Pope Honorius I]], whose seeming endorsement of Monothelitism was later condemned as [[heresy]]]]
 +
In his letter to [[Pope Honorius I]], Sergius went so far as to admit that "one operation," though used by several [[Church Fathers]], is a strange expression that might suggest a denial of the "unconfused union of the two natures" (of Christ). However, he also argued that the idea of "two operations" is equally if not more dangerous, suggesting "two contrary wills" at war within Jesus. He concluded that it is best to confess that "from one and the same incarnate Word of God (Jesus) proceed indivisibly and inseparably both the divine and the human operations."
  
−
Honorius replied by praising Sergius for rejecting his "new expression" of "two operations," approving his recommendations and refraining from criticizing any of the propositions of Cyrus. He even goes so far as to state that "We acknowledge one Will of our Lord Jesus Christ." However, in another letter to Sergius the pope says he has informed Cyrus that the new expressions, "one operation" and "two operations" are to be dropped.
+
Honorius replied by praising Sergius for rejecting "two operations," approving his recommendations, and refraining from criticizing any of the propositions of Cyrus. In a crucial sentence, he also stated that "We acknowledge one Will of our Lord Jesus Christ."
  
−
Late in 638 the ''Ecthesis of Heraclius'' was issued, composed by Sergius and authorized by the emperor. Sergius himself died on December 9 of that year, a few days after having celebrated a council in which the ''Ecthesis'' was acclaimed as "truly agreeing with the Apostolic teaching." Cyrus received the news of this council with great joy. The ''Ecthesis'' reaffirms the doctrines of five [[Ecumenical Council]]s, including Chalcedon, but adds a prohibition against speaking of either "one operation" or "two operations," at the same time affirming the "one will in Christ lest contrary wills should be held." Honorius, meanwhile had died on  October 12 and was not in a position to confirm whether this statement conformed with his view.
+
===The ''Ecthesis'' of Heraclius===
 +
Late in 638, the ''Ecthesis of Heraclius'' was issued, composed by Sergius and authorized by the emperor. Sergius himself died on December 9 of that year, a few days after having celebrated a church council in which the ''Ecthesis'' was acclaimed as "truly agreeing with the Apostolic teaching" of popes Honorius and Vigilius. Cyrus of Alexandria received the news of this council with great joy.
  
−
Papal envoys promised to submit the ''Echthesis'' to  [[Pope Severinus], but the new pople was not consecrated until May, 640 and died just two months later without having offered his opinion on the ''Ecthesis''. Pope [[John IV]], who succeeded him in December, quickly convened a synod which condemn it formally. Emperor Heraclius, thinking the ''Echthesis'' had promulgated the very of Pope Honorius, now disowned the ''Echthesis'' in a letter to John IV and laid the blame on Sergius.
+
The ''Ecthesis'' reaffirmed the doctrines of five [[Ecumenical Council]]s, including Chalcedon, but added a prohibition against speaking of either "one operation" or "two operations," at the same time affirming the "one will in Christ lest contrary wills should be held." Honorius, meanwhile, had died on October 12 and was not in a position to confirm whether this statement conformed with his view.
  
−
When Heraclius died in February 641, the pope wrote to the elder son of Heraclius, saying that the Ecthesis would doubtless now be withdrawn and apologizing for Pope Honorius, who, he said, had not meant to teach one will in Christ. Saint [[Maximus the Confessor]] published a similar defense of Honorius.
+
Papal envoys promised to submit the ''Ecthesis'' to [[Pope Severinus]], but the new pope was not consecrated until May, 640 and died just two months later without having offered his opinion on the ''Ecthesis''. Pope [[John IV]], who succeeded him in December, quickly convened a [[synod]] which, to the emperor's surprise, formally condemned it. Emperor Heraclius, thinking the ''Echthesis'' had only promulgated the view of Pope Honorius, now disowned the ''Echthesis'' in a letter to John IV and laid the blame on Sergius. When Heraclius died in February 641, the pope wrote to his successor, [[Constantine III (Byzantine emperor)|Constantine III]], expecting that the ''Ecthesis'' would now be withdrawn and also apologizing for Pope Honorius, who, he said, had not meant to teach "one will" in Christ.
  
−
However, the new patriarch of Constantinople, Pyrrhus, was a supporter of the ''Ecthesis'' and confirmed it in a major council. Sophronius, too, was succeeded in Jerusalem by a supporter of the ''Ecthesis'', and another Monthelite bishop now sat in the See of Antioch. In Alexandria, the city fell into the hands of the Muslims under Amru in 640. Among the great cities of the empire, only Rome thus remained "orthodox," while whole  Constantinople, Antioch, Jerusalem, and Alexandria were Monothelite, the latter soon to become Muslim.
+
However, the new patriarch, Pyrrhus, was a supporter of the ''Ecthesis'' and the document was soon confirmed in a major church council at [[Constantinople]]. In [[Jerusalem]], the orthodox champion [[Sophronius]] was succeeded by a supporter of the ''Ecthesis'', and another Monothelite bishop now sat in the see of [[Antioch]]. In [[Alexandria]], the city fell into the hands of the [[Muslim]]s in 640. Among the great cities of the empire, only [[Rome]] thus remained "orthodox," while Constantinople, Antioch, Jerusalem, and Alexandria were Monothelite, the latter soon to become Muslim.
  
−
The bishops of Cyprus, independent of any patriarch, held a synod 29 May, 643, against the Ecthesis. They wrote to Pope Theodore a letter of entreaty: "Christ, our God, has instituted your Apostolic chair, O holy head, as a God-fixed and immovable foundation. For thou, as truly spake the Divine Word, art Peter, and upon thy foundation the pillars of the Church are fixed, and to thee He committed the keys of the kingdom of Heaven. He ordered thee to bind and loose with authority on earth and in heaven. Thou art set as the destroyer of profane heresies, as Coryphæus and leader of the orthodox and unsullied Faith. Despise not then, Father, the Faith of our Fathers, tossed by waves and imperilled; disperse the rule of the foolish with the light of thy divine knowledge, O most holy. Destroy the blasphemies and insolence of the new heretics with their novel expressions. For nothing is wanting to your orthodox and pious definition and tradition for the augmentation of the Faith amongst us. For we — O inspired one, you who hold converse with the holy Apostles and sit with them — believe and confess from of old since our very swaddling clothes, teaching according to the holy and God-fearing Pope Leo, and declaring that 'each nature works with the communion of the other what is proper to it'", etc. They declare themselves ready to be martyred rather than forsake the doctrine of St. Leo: but their Archbishop Sergius, when the persecution arose, was found on the side of the persecutors, not of the martyrs. It is abundantly clear that St. Maximus and his Constantinopolitan friends, St. Sophronius and the bishops of Palestine, Sergius and his suffragans, had no notion that the Apostolic See had been compromised by the letters of Honorius, but they look to it as the only port of salvation. Similarly in 646 the bishops of Africa and the adjoining islands held councils, in the name of which the primates of Numidia, Byzacene and Mauritania sent a joint letter to Pope Theodore, complaining of the Ecthesis: "No one can doubt that there is in the Apostolic See a great and unfailing fountain pouring forth waters for all Christians", and so forth. They enclose letters to the emperor and to the patriarch Paul, to be sent to Constantinople by the pope. They are afraid to write directly, for the former governor, Gregory (who had presided at the disputation of his friend St. Maximus with Pyrrhus) had revolted and made himself emperor, and had just been defeated; this was a blow to orthodoxy, which it brought into discredit at Constantinople. Victor, elected primate of Carthage after the letters were written, added one of his own.
+
===Constans II and his ''Type''===
 +
[[Image:Theodorus I.jpg|thumb|Pope Theodore I]]
 +
[[Constans II]] became the new emperor in 641, and like others before him he attempted a reconciliation between the factions based on a policy of banning either extreme, a policy doomed to failure. In May 643, the bishops of Cyprus, independent of any patriarch, held a synod against the ''Ecthesis'', entreating [[Pope Theodore I]], who had ascended to the throne of [[Saint Peter]] the previous year, for support, declaring themselves ready to be martyred rather than forsake the "orthodox" doctrine of "two wills." In 646 certain bishops of Africa and the adjoining islands also held councils and likewise wrote afterward to Theodore in solidarity.
  
−
Paul the patriarch whom the Emperor Constans had substituted for Pyrrhus, had not been acknowledged by Pope Theodore, who demanded of him that Pyrrhus should first be tried by a council before two representatives of the Holy See. Paul's reply is preserved: the views he exposes are those of the Ecthesis, and he defends them by referring to Honorius and Sergius. Theodore pronounced a sentence of deposition against him, and Paul retaliated by destroying the Latin altar which belonged to the Roman See in the palace of Placidia at Constantinople, in order that the papal envoys might be unable to offer the Holy Sacrifice; he also persecuted them, together with many orthodox laymen and priests, by imprisonment, exile, or stripes. But Paul, in spite of this violence, had no idea of resisting the definitions of Rome. Until now, Honorius had not been disowned there, but defended. It was said that he had not taught one will; but the prohibition in the Ecthesis of two operations was but an enforcement of the course Honorius had approved, and nothing had as yet, it seems, been officially published at Rome on this point. Paul, somewhat naturally, thought it would be sufficient if he dropped the teaching of one will, and prohibited all reference to one will or two wills as well as to one operation or two operations; it could hardly be urged that this was not in accordance with the teaching of Pope Honorius. It would be a measure of peace, and East and West would be again united. Paul therefore persuaded the emperor to withdraw the Ecthesis, and to substitute for that elaborate confession of Faith a mere disciplinary measure forbidding all four expressions under the severest penalties; none of the emperor's orthodox subjects have any longer permission to quarrel over them, but no blame is to attach to any who may have used either alternative in the past.Transgression of this law is to involve deposition for bishops and clerics, excommunication and expulsion for monks, loss of office and dignity for officials, fines for richer laymen, corporal punishment and permanent exile for the poorer. By this cruel law heresy is to be blameless and orthodoxy forbidden. It is known as the Type of Constans. It is not a Monothelite document, for it forbids that heresy just as much as the Catholic Faith. Its date falls between Sept. 648 and Sept. 649. Pope Theodore died 5 May of the latter year, and was succeeded in July by St. Martin I. In October St. Martin held a great council at the Lateran, at which 105 bishops were present. The pope's opening speech gives a history of the heresy, and condemns the Ecthesis, Cyrus, Sergius, Pyrrhus, Paul, and the Type. John IV had spoken of Sergius with respect; and Martin does not mention Honorius, for it was obviously impossible to defend him if the Type was to be condemned as heresy. Stephen of Dora, then on his third visit to Rome, presented a long memorial, full of devotion to the Apostolic See. A deputation followed, of 37 Greek abbots residing in or near Rome, who had apparently fled before the Saracens from their various homes in Jerusalem, Africa, Armenia, Cilicia, etc. They demanded the condemnation of Sergius, Pyrrhus, Paul, and Cyrus and the anathematizing of the Type by the Apostolic and head See. The heretical documents read were part of a letter of Theodore of Pharan, the seventh proposition of Cyrus, the letter of Sergius to Cyrus, excerpts from the synods held by Sergius and Pyrrhus (who had now repented of his repentance), and the approval of the Ecthesis by Cyrus. The letter of Sergius to Honorius was not read, nor was anything said about the correspondence of the latter with Sergius. St. Martin summed up; then the letter of Paul to Pope Theodore and the Type were read. The council admitted the good intention of the latter document (so as to spare the emperor while condemning Paul), but declared it heretical for forbidding the teaching of two operations and two wills. Numerous excerpts from the Fathers and from Monophysite writers were read, and twenty canons were agreed to, the eighteenth of which condemns Theodore of Pharan, Cyrus, Sergius, Pyrrhus, Paul, the Ecthesis, and the Type, under anathema. A letter to the emperor was signed by all. An encyclical letter was sent throughout the Church in the name of St. Martin and the council, addressed to all bishops, priests, deacons, abbots, monks, ascetics, and to the entire sacred fulness of the Catholic Church. This was a final and complete condemnation of the Constantinopolitan policy. Rome had spoken ex cathedra.
+
The situation now deteriorated into violence. Although Emperor Constans had exiled Patriarch Pyrrhus to Africa, his successor, Paul, continued to support the ''Ecthesis''. Pope Theodore, from Rome, pronounced a sentence of deposition against Paul, and the patriarch retaliated by destroying the Latin altar which belonged to the Roman see at Constantinople. He also punished the papal representatives in Constantinople, as well as certain laymen and priests who supported the Roman position, by imprisonment, exile, or whipping.
  
−
Stephen of Dora had been before appointed papal vicar in the East, but he had by error been informed only of his duty to depose heretical bishops, and not that he was authorized to substitute orthodox bishops in their place. The pope now gave this commission to John, Bishop of Philadelphia in Palestine, who was ordered to appoint bishops, priests, and deacons in the patriarchates of Antioch and Jerusalem. Martin also sent letters to these patriarchates, and to Peter, who seems to have been governor, asking him to support his vicar; this Peter was a friend and correspondent of St. Maximus. The pope deposed John, Archbishop of Thessalonica, and declared the appointments of Macarius of Antioch and Peter of Alexandria to be null and void. Constans retaliated by having St. Martin kidnapped at Rome, and taken a prisoner to Constantinople. The saint refused to accept the Ecthesis, and after sufferings, many of which he has himself related in a touching document, he died a martyr in the Crimea in March, 655 (see POPE MARTIN I). St. Maximus (662), his disciple the monk Anastasius (also 662), and another Anastasius, a papal envoy (666), died of ill-treatment, martyrs to their orthodoxy and devotion to the Apostolic See.
+
Paul clearly believed himself to be in accord with two previous popes, Honorius and Vigilis; but he was not unwilling to compromise in the name of unity. He therefore persuaded the emperor to withdraw the ''Ecthesis'' and to substitute an orthodox confession of faith together with a disciplinary measure forbidding controversial expressions regarding Christ's will. No blame was to attach to any who had used such expressions in the past, but transgression of the new law would involve deposition for [[bishop]]s and clerics, [[excommunication]] and expulsion for [[monk]]s, loss of office and dignity for officials, fines for richer laymen, and corporal punishment and permanent exile for the poor. Known as the ''Type of Constans'' it was enacted sometime between September 648 and September 649, and it proved to be even less successful than the ''Ecthesis'' had been.
  
−
While St. Martin was being insulted and tortured at Constantinople, the patriarch Paul was dying. "Alas, this will increase the severity of my judgment", he exclaimed to the emperor, who paid him a visit; and Constans was induced to spare the pope's life for the moment. At Paul's death Pyrrhus was restored. His successor Peter sent an ambiguous letter to Pope Eugenius, which made no mention of two operations, thus observing the prescription of the Type. The Roman people raised a riot when it was read in Sta. Maria Maggiore, and would not permit the pope to continue his Mass until he promised to reject the letter. Constans sent a letter to the pope by one Gregory, with a gift to St. Peter. It was rumoured at Constantinople that the pope's envoys would accept a declaration of "one and two wills" (two because of the natures, one on account of the union). St. Maximus refused to believe the report. In fact Peter wrote to Pope Vitalian (657-672) professing "one and two wills and operations" and adding mutilated quotations from the Fathers; but the explanation was thought unsatisfactory, presumably because it was only an excuse for upholding the Type. In 663 Constans came to Rome, intending to make it his residence, on account of his unpopularity at Constantinople, for besides putting the pope to death and proscribing the orthodox faith, he had murdered his brother Theodosius. The pope received him with all due honour, and Constans, who had refused to confirm the elections of Martin and Eugenius, ordered the name of Vitalian to be inscribed on the diptychs of Constantinople. No mention seems to have been made of the Type. But Constans did not find Rome agreeable. After spoiling the churches, he retired to Sicily, where he oppressed the people. He was murdered in his bath in 668. Vitalian vigorously opposed rebellion in Sicily, and Constantine Pogonatus, the new emperor, found the island at peace on his arrival. It does not seem that he took any interest in the Type, which was doubtless not enforced, though not abolished, for he was fully occupied with his wars against the Saracens until 678, when he determined to summon a general council to end what he regarded as a quarrel between the Sees of Rome and Constantinople. He wrote in this sense to Pope Donus (676-78), who was already dead. His successor St. Agatho thereupon assembled a synod at Rome and ordered others to be held in the West. A delay of two years was thus caused, and the heretical patriarchs Theodore of Constantinople and Macarius of Antioch assured the emperor that the pope despised the Easterns and their monarch, and they tried, but unsuccessfully, to get the name of Vitalian removed from the diptychs. The emperor asked for three representatives at least to be sent from Rome, with twelve archbishops or bishops from the West and four monks from each of the Greek monasteries in the West, perhaps as interpreters. He also sent Theodore into exile, probably because he was an obstacle to reunion.
+
Pope Theodore died May 5, 649, and was succeeded in July by Pope [[Martin I]]. In October, Martin held a great council at the [[Lateran]], at which 105 bishops were present. The council admitted the good intention of the ''Type'' (apparently so as to spare the emperor while condemning Patriarch Paul), but declared the document heretical for forbidding the teaching of "two operations" and "two wills." It passed 20 [[canons]], the eighteenth of which [[anathema]]tized Cyrus, Sergius, Pyrrhus, Paul, the ''Ecthesis'', and the ''Type''. (Pope Honorius, who had caused so much trouble by seeming to endorse the "one will," however, escaped criticism.) An encyclical letter summarizing the proceedings was sent to churches and monasteries throughout the empire in the name of Pope Martin I and the council.
  
−
The first session of the Sixth Œcumenical Council took place at Constantinople (7 Nov., 680), Constantine Pogonatus presiding and having on his left, in the place of honour, the papal legates. Macarius of Antioch was the only prelate who stood up for Monothelitism, and he was in due course condemned as a heretic (see MACARIUS OF ANTIOCH). The letters of St. Agatho and of the Roman Council insisted on the decisions of the Lateran Council, and repeatedly affirmed the inerrancy of the Apostolic See. These documents were acclaimed by the council, and accepted by George, the new Patriarch of Constantinople and his suffragans. Macarius had appealed to Honorius; and after his condemnation a packet which he had delivered to the emperor was opened, and in it were found the letters of Sergius toHonorius and of Honorius to Sergius. As these were at best similar to the Type, already declared heretical, it was unavoidable that they should be condemned. The fifth council had set the example of condemning dead writers, who had died in Catholic communion, but George suggested that his dead predecessors might be spared, and only their teaching anathematized. The legates might have saved the name of Honorius also had they agreed to this, but they evidently had directions from Rome to make no objection to his condemnation if it seemed necessary. The final dogmatic decree contains the decisions of the five preceding general councils, condemns the Ecthesis and the Type, and heretics by name, including Honorius, and "greets with uplifted hands" the letters of Pope Agatho and his council (see POPE HONORIUS I). The address to the emperor, signed by all the bishops, declares that they have followed Agatho, and he the Apostolic teaching. "With us fought the prince of the Apostles, for to assist us we had his imitator and the successor to his chair. The ancient city of Rome proffered you a divinely written confession and caused the daylight of dogmas to rise by the Western parchment. And the ink shone, and by Agatho, Peter spoke; and you, the autocrat king, voted with the Almighty who reigns with you." A letter to the pope was also signed by all the Fathers. The emperor gave effect to the decree in a lengthy edict, in which he echoes the decisions of the council, adding: "These are the teachings of the voices of the Gospels and the Apostles, these are the doctrines of the holy synods and of the elect and patristic tongues; these have been preserved untainted by Peter, the rock of the faith, the head of the Apostles; in this faith we live and reign." The emperor's letter to the pope is full of Such expressions; as for example: "Glory be to God, Who does wondrous things, Who has kept safe the Faith among you unharmed. For how should He not do so in that rock on which He founded His Church, and prophesied that the gates of hell, all the ambushes of heretics, should not prevail against it? From it, as from the vault of heaven, the word of the true confession flashed forth," etc. But St. Agatho, a worker of many miracles, was dead, and did not receive the letter, so that it fell to St. Leo II to confirm the council. Thus was the East united again to the West after an incomplete but deplorable schism.
+
===Martyrdoms===
 +
[[Image:Pope Martin I.jpg|thumb|left|150px|Pope [[Martin I]] became a martyr rather than submit to the ''Type of Constans'']]
  
−
It would seem that in 687 Justinian II believed that the sixth council was not fully enforced, for he wrote to Pope Conon that he had assembled the papal envoys, the patriarchs, metropolitans, bishops, the senate and civil officials and representatives of his various armies, and made them sign the original acts which had recently been discovered. In 711 the throne was seized by Philippicus Bardanes, who had been the pupil of Abbot Stephen, the disciple "or rather leader" of Macarius of Antioch. He restored to the diptychs Sergius, Honorius, and the other heretics condemned by the council; he burned the acts (but privately, in the palace), he deposed the Patriarch Cyrus, and exiled some persons who refused to subscribe a rejection of the council. He fell, 4 June, 713, and orthodoxy was restored by Anastasius II (713-15). Pope Constantine had refused to recognize Bardanes. The intruded patriarch, John VI, wrote him a long letter of apology, explaining that he had submitted to Bardanes to prevent worse evils, and asserting in many words the headship of Rome over the universal Church. This was the last of Monothelitism.
+
The pope now moved forcefully against pro-Monothelite churchmen under his jurisdiction. He commissioned Bishop John of Philadelphia to appoint orthodox [[bishop]]s, [[priest]]s, and [[deacon]]s in the patriarchates of [[Antioch]] and [[Jerusalem]]. Martin also deposed Archbishop John of Thessalonika and declared the appointments of [[Macarius of Antioch]] and [[Peter of Alexandria]] to be null and void.
  
−
Meanwhile, Saint Sophronius as the patriarch of Jerusalem, although he had died just before Sergius, had published a formal defense of the dogma of "two operations" and "two wills," which was afterward approved by the Sixth Ecumenical Council. This document was the first full exposition of what thus became the Catholic doctrine.
+
Emperor Constans retaliated by having Martin kidnapped from [[Rome]] and taken as a prisoner to [[Constantinople]]. The pope still refused to accept either the ''Ecthesis'' or the ''Type,'' and he died a [[martyr]] in the Crimea in March 655. Other famous martyrs in the controversy include [[Maximus the Confessor]] (662), his disciple and fellow monk, [[Anastasius]] (662), and another Anastasius who was a papal envoy (666).
 +
 
 +
Patriarch Paul of Constantinople, meanwhile, died of natural causes. His successor, Peter, sent an ambiguous letter to [[Pope Eugenius]], which made no mention of either one or two "operations," thus observing the prescription of the ''Type''. In 663, Constans came to Rome, intending to make it his residence. The new pope, [[Pope Vitalian|Vitalian]], received him with all due honor, and Constans—who had refused to confirm the elections of Martin and Eugenius—ordered the name of Vitalian to be inscribed on the diptychs of Constantinople. No mention seems to have been made of the ''Type,'' and Constans soon retired to [[Sicily]], where he was murdered in his bath in 668.
 +
 
 +
===The Sixth Ecumenical Council===
 +
The new emperor, Constantine Pogonatus, does not seem to have enforced the ''Type,'' although it was not abolished. In 678, he summoned a general council to effect unity between the Eastern and Western churches. He wrote in this sense to [[Pope Donus]] (676-78), who had already died; but [[Pope Agatho]] convened a council at Rome toward this end. The emperor, for his part, sent the Monothelite Patriarch Theodore of Constantinople into exile, as he had become an obstacle to reunion.
 +
 
 +
[[Image:Agatho.gif|thumb|Pope Agatho]]
 +
 
 +
The first session of the [[Sixth Ecumenical Council]] took place at Constantinople on November 7, 680, with Emperor Constantine Pogonatus presiding. Patriarch [[Macarius of Antioch]] was outspoken for Monothelitism, but with the emperor now opposed to this cause, Marcarius was condemned as a heretic. George, the new patriarch of Constantinople, generally upheld the Roman view. However, as Macarius had appealed to the late Pope Honorius, this pope was likewise condemned, a serious embarrassment to the [[papacy]]. The final decree of the council condemns the ''Ecthesis'' and the ''Type'' and several heretics, including Honorius, while affirming the letters of [[Pope Agatho]] and his council. As Agatho had died before receiving the results of the council, it fell to Pope [[Leo II]] to confirm it, and thus the churches of the East and West were once again united.
 +
 
 +
Monothelism still refused to die, however, and in 711, the imperial throne was seized by [[Philippicus Bardanes]], who had been the pupil of the Monothelite monk Abbot Stephen, an associate of Macarius of Antioch. He restored to the [[diptych]]s the "heretics" Patriarch Sergius, Pope Honorius, and the others condemned by the Sixth Ecumenical Council. He also deposed Patriarch Cyrus of Constantinople and exiled a number of persons who refused to subscribe his condemnation of the council.
 +
 
 +
Then, in late May 713, Opsikian troops rebelled in [[Thrace]]. Several of their officers penetrated the imperial palace and blinded Philippicus on June 3, 713. Orthodoxy was soon restored by [[Anastasius II]] (713-15). This was, in effect, the end of Monothelitism as a major force.
  
 
==Notable Figures in the Monothelite Debate==
 
==Notable Figures in the Monothelite Debate==
−
*[[Patriarch Sergius I of Constantinople]]—a supporter of the monothelite position
+
[[Image:Maximus Confessor.jpg|thumb|Saint Maximus the Confessor]]
−
*Bishop [[Cyrus of Alexandria]]—one of the originators of the monothelite position
+
*[[Emperor Heraclius]]—Suggested "one operation" of Christ's will and promulgated the ''Echthesis'' as a compromise position, in effect banning the "orthodox" view as well as his own
−
*[[Pope Honorius I]]—Condemned at Constantinople for his failure to combat Monothelitism<ref>The Acts of the Council state: "And with these we define that there shall be expelled from the holy Church of God and anathematized Honorius who was some time Pope of Old Rome, because of what we found written by him to Sergius, that in all respects he followed his view and confirmed his impious doctrines" (13th Session) and "To Honorius, the heretic, anathema!" (16th Session).</ref>
+
*[[Patriarch Sergius I of Constantinople]]—early supporter of the Monothelitism
−
*[[Pope]] [[Martin I]]—Martyred by Byzantine authorities for his condemnation of Monothelitism at the First Lateran Synod
+
*Bishop [[Cyrus of Alexandria]]—promoter of Monothelitism as a means of unifying the African churches
−
*[[Maximus the Confessor]]—Martyred by Byzantine authorities for his condemnation of Monothelitism
+
*Saint [[Sophrinius]] of Jerusalem—early leader of the opposition to Monothelitism
−
*[[Pope Agatho]]—Condemned Monothelitsm at the Council of Constantinople
+
*[[Pope Honorius I]]—Endorsed "one will" of Christ, for which he was condemned at Constantinople as a heretic
 +
*[[Emperor Constans II]]—Persecuted those who affirmed "two wills"
 +
*[[Pope]] [[Martin I]]—Martyred by Byzantine authorities for his condemnation of Monothelitism
 +
*[[Maximus the Confessor]]—Also martyred under Constans II for his opposition to Monothelitism
 +
*[[Pope Agatho]]—Opponent of Monothelitsm whose views were endorsed by the [[Sixth Ecumenical Council]] at Constantinople
  
 
==See also==
 
==See also==
 
*[[Monophysitism]]
 
*[[Monophysitism]]
−
*[[Chalcedonian]]
+
*[[Council of Chalcedon]]
−
*[[Miaphysite]]
+
*[[Maximus the Confessor]]
−
*[[Papal Oath (Liber Diurnus)]]
+
*[[Pope Honorius I]]
−
 
+
*[[Pope Martin I]]
−
==Notes==
 
−
<div class="references-small">
 
−
<references/>
 
−
</div>
 
  
 
==References==
 
==References==
 +
* Allen, Pauline, and Bronwen Neil.'' Maximus the Confessor and His Companions: Documents From Exile''. Oxford early Christian texts. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 2002. ISBN 9780198299912.
 +
* Hardy, Edward Rochie, and Cyril Charles Richardson. ''Christology of the Later Fathers''. Library of Christian classics, v. 3. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1977. ISBN 978-0664241520.
 +
* Hovorun, Cyril. ''Will, Action and Freedom: Christological Controversies in the Seventh Century''. The medieval Mediterranean, v. 77. Leiden: Brill, 2008. ISBN 9789004166660.
 +
* Kaegi, Walter Emil. ''Heraclius, Emperor of Byzantium''. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003. ISBN 9780521814591.
 +
* Neil, Bronwen. ''Seventh-Century Popes and Martyrs: The Political Hagiography of Anastasius Bibliothecarius''. Studia antiqua australiensia, v. 2. Turnhout: Brepols, 2006. ISBN 9782503518879.
  
 
==External links==
 
==External links==
−
*[http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10502a.htm Catholic Encyclopedia: Monothelitism and Monothelites]
+
All links retrieved November 9, 2022.
−
 
+
*[http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10502a.htm Monothelitism and Monothelites] ''Catholic Encyclopedia''
−
{{Template:Catholicism||collapsed‎}}
 
−
{{History of the Roman Catholic Church|collapsed}}
 
−
{{Template:Roman Catholic Theology|uncollapsed‎}}
 
  
 
[[Category:Religion]]
 
[[Category:Religion]]

Latest revision as of 21:11, 9 November 2022

Christ in Gethsemane: Was Jesus' human will distinct from the will of God?

Monothelitism (from the Greek, referring to "one will") was a theological doctrine and movement influential in the seventh century C.E. Its teaching was that Christ's human will was at all times completely one with the will of God.

An outgrowth of the Monophysite controversy from the previous two centuries, Monothelitism held that while Christ had two natures (both human and divine), he had only one will (divine/human), which is not distinguishable from the will of God. Simultaneously the orthodox view holds that Jesus had both a human will and a divine will.

Evidence indicates that resulting from the suggestion of Emperor Heraclius (610–641), the Monothelite position was promulgated by Patriarch Sergius I of Constantinople. This succeeded for a time in reconciling the Monophysite churches of the East and Africa with the Council of Chalcedon. In its early stages, the idea was either endorsed or tolerated by Pope Honorius I (625–638). After Honorius' death, however, Monothelitism was strongly opposed by succeeding popes. In the East, it was supported by several emperors and leading Christian patriarchs, resulting in a bitterly contested schism, giving rise to the martyrdom of the orthodox figures Pope Martin I and Saint Maximus the Confessor, among others.

Monothelitism was finally condemned at the Third Council of Constantinople (the Sixth Ecumenical Council (680–681), which also declared Honorius I to be a heretic. It came to an end only after the last Monothelite Emperor, Philippicus Bardanes, was removed from power in the early eighth century C.E.

Background

Justinian I was one of several emperors who had tried unsuccessfully to reconcile the Monophysites and "orthodox" Christians.

Monothelitism grew out of the christological controversies dealing with the question of whether Christ had one nature (divine/human) or two (divine and human). In these bitter and contentious debates, which often divided the eastern and western Christian churches, the Nestorians had emphasized two distinct natures in Christ, the Monophysites had insisted on one nature in which Christ's divinity and humanity were fully harmonized, and the "Orthodox" ultimately prevailed with a formula which upheld the idea of "two natures" but rejected the notion that these natures were in any way distinct from one another. The definition of the Council of Chalcedon thus states that Jesus was one person with two natures and that these two natures are "without distinction or confusion."

In the short run, however, this formula proved inadequate to solve the problem, being considered far too "Nestorian" for Monophysite churchmen. Many churches, especially in the East and Africa, remained Monophysite, and various formulas were attempted by the eastern Emperors to reconcile the opposing factions, resulting more often than not in even more division and bitter feuds between Constantinople and the Roman papacy.

Monothelitism emerged as another compromise position, in which the former Monophysites might agree that Jesus had two natures if it were also affirmed that his will was completely united with that of God. It was also hoped that Chalcedonian Christians might agree that Jesus' will was always united with the will of God, as long as it was also affirmed that Christ also had two natures.

The terminology of the Monothelite controversy is highly technical, causing even one pope, Honorius, to stumble into this "heresy." At stake was the question as to whether Jesus was truly "human," for if his will was always that of God, how could he share in people's humanity or be truly tempted by Satan, as the Bible reports he was? Moreover, if Jesus had only one (completely divine, yet also human) will, how can one explain his agony in the Garden of Gethsemane, when he himself appears to make a distinction between his will and that of God? Monothelytes sometimes dealt with this objection with reference to "one operation" of Christ's will, meaning his will always operated in union with God's will, even though, as a human being he might be tempted to act otherwise.

Details

Saint Sophrinius of Jerusalem led the early opposition to Monothelitism
Coin bearing the image of Emperor Heraclius

Though not a trained theologian, Patriarch Sergius I of Constantinople, as the bishop of the capital city of the Byzantine Empire, held a position of authority among the Christian churches rivaled only by that of the bishop of Rome. Sergius wrote that Emperor Heraclius came to Armenia about 622 during a military campaign, where he disputed with a Monophysite leader named Paul, refuting his claims by arguing for two "natures" in Christ but admitting "one operation" in terms of Christ's will. Later on, the emperor inquired of Bishop Cyrus of Phasis whether his words were correct. Cyrus was uncertain, and at the emperor's order, he wrote to Sergius in Constantinople, whom Heraclius greatly trusted, for advice. Sergius in reply sent him a letter citing several authorities, including the late Pope Vigilius, in support of "one operation" and "one will." In June, 631, Cyrus was promoted by the emperor to the important position of patriarch of Alexandria.

Practically the whole of Egypt was at this time still Monophysite. Former emperors had made efforts toward reunion, to little success. In the late fifth century, the compromise document known as the Henotikon of Emperor Zeno had resulted in the so-called Acacian schism between Rome and Constantinople and yet was rejected by many Monophysites, as well as the popes. In the sixth century, Justinian I's condemnation of the allegedly Nestorian Three Chapters had nearly caused a another schism between East and West without in the least placating the Monophysites.

In Alexandria, Cyrus was for the moment more successful. He obtained the acceptance by the Monophysites of a series of nine theological points, in which Christ's "one operation" of divine/human will was asserted along with the Chalcedonian "two natures" and "one composite (divine/human) hypostasis (person)." Through this formula, Cyrus effected the reunion of the Alexandrian church and nearly all of the Egyptian and northern African churches as well.

However, the future Saint Sophronius—a much venerated monk of Palestine, soon to become patriarch of Jerusalem, who was in Alexandria at this time—strongly objected to the expression "one operation." He thus went to Constantinople and urged Patriarch Sergius that the seventh of the nine "chapters" promoted by Cyrus, affirming "one operation," must be withdrawn. Sergius was not willing to risk losing the African churches again by ordering this, but he did write to Cyrus that it would be well in the future to drop both the expressions "one operation" and "two operations." He also advised referring the question to the pope. Cyrus, who had much to lose by dropping the idea of "one operation," politely responded that Sergius was, in effect, declaring the emperor to be wrong.

Honorius endorses 'one Will'

Pope Honorius I, whose seeming endorsement of Monothelitism was later condemned as heresy

In his letter to Pope Honorius I, Sergius went so far as to admit that "one operation," though used by several Church Fathers, is a strange expression that might suggest a denial of the "unconfused union of the two natures" (of Christ). However, he also argued that the idea of "two operations" is equally if not more dangerous, suggesting "two contrary wills" at war within Jesus. He concluded that it is best to confess that "from one and the same incarnate Word of God (Jesus) proceed indivisibly and inseparably both the divine and the human operations."

Honorius replied by praising Sergius for rejecting "two operations," approving his recommendations, and refraining from criticizing any of the propositions of Cyrus. In a crucial sentence, he also stated that "We acknowledge one Will of our Lord Jesus Christ."

The Ecthesis of Heraclius

Late in 638, the Ecthesis of Heraclius was issued, composed by Sergius and authorized by the emperor. Sergius himself died on December 9 of that year, a few days after having celebrated a church council in which the Ecthesis was acclaimed as "truly agreeing with the Apostolic teaching" of popes Honorius and Vigilius. Cyrus of Alexandria received the news of this council with great joy.

The Ecthesis reaffirmed the doctrines of five Ecumenical Councils, including Chalcedon, but added a prohibition against speaking of either "one operation" or "two operations," at the same time affirming the "one will in Christ lest contrary wills should be held." Honorius, meanwhile, had died on October 12 and was not in a position to confirm whether this statement conformed with his view.

Papal envoys promised to submit the Ecthesis to Pope Severinus, but the new pope was not consecrated until May, 640 and died just two months later without having offered his opinion on the Ecthesis. Pope John IV, who succeeded him in December, quickly convened a synod which, to the emperor's surprise, formally condemned it. Emperor Heraclius, thinking the Echthesis had only promulgated the view of Pope Honorius, now disowned the Echthesis in a letter to John IV and laid the blame on Sergius. When Heraclius died in February 641, the pope wrote to his successor, Constantine III, expecting that the Ecthesis would now be withdrawn and also apologizing for Pope Honorius, who, he said, had not meant to teach "one will" in Christ.

However, the new patriarch, Pyrrhus, was a supporter of the Ecthesis and the document was soon confirmed in a major church council at Constantinople. In Jerusalem, the orthodox champion Sophronius was succeeded by a supporter of the Ecthesis, and another Monothelite bishop now sat in the see of Antioch. In Alexandria, the city fell into the hands of the Muslims in 640. Among the great cities of the empire, only Rome thus remained "orthodox," while Constantinople, Antioch, Jerusalem, and Alexandria were Monothelite, the latter soon to become Muslim.

Constans II and his Type

Pope Theodore I

Constans II became the new emperor in 641, and like others before him he attempted a reconciliation between the factions based on a policy of banning either extreme, a policy doomed to failure. In May 643, the bishops of Cyprus, independent of any patriarch, held a synod against the Ecthesis, entreating Pope Theodore I, who had ascended to the throne of Saint Peter the previous year, for support, declaring themselves ready to be martyred rather than forsake the "orthodox" doctrine of "two wills." In 646 certain bishops of Africa and the adjoining islands also held councils and likewise wrote afterward to Theodore in solidarity.

The situation now deteriorated into violence. Although Emperor Constans had exiled Patriarch Pyrrhus to Africa, his successor, Paul, continued to support the Ecthesis. Pope Theodore, from Rome, pronounced a sentence of deposition against Paul, and the patriarch retaliated by destroying the Latin altar which belonged to the Roman see at Constantinople. He also punished the papal representatives in Constantinople, as well as certain laymen and priests who supported the Roman position, by imprisonment, exile, or whipping.

Paul clearly believed himself to be in accord with two previous popes, Honorius and Vigilis; but he was not unwilling to compromise in the name of unity. He therefore persuaded the emperor to withdraw the Ecthesis and to substitute an orthodox confession of faith together with a disciplinary measure forbidding controversial expressions regarding Christ's will. No blame was to attach to any who had used such expressions in the past, but transgression of the new law would involve deposition for bishops and clerics, excommunication and expulsion for monks, loss of office and dignity for officials, fines for richer laymen, and corporal punishment and permanent exile for the poor. Known as the Type of Constans it was enacted sometime between September 648 and September 649, and it proved to be even less successful than the Ecthesis had been.

Pope Theodore died May 5, 649, and was succeeded in July by Pope Martin I. In October, Martin held a great council at the Lateran, at which 105 bishops were present. The council admitted the good intention of the Type (apparently so as to spare the emperor while condemning Patriarch Paul), but declared the document heretical for forbidding the teaching of "two operations" and "two wills." It passed 20 canons, the eighteenth of which anathematized Cyrus, Sergius, Pyrrhus, Paul, the Ecthesis, and the Type. (Pope Honorius, who had caused so much trouble by seeming to endorse the "one will," however, escaped criticism.) An encyclical letter summarizing the proceedings was sent to churches and monasteries throughout the empire in the name of Pope Martin I and the council.

Martyrdoms

Pope Martin I became a martyr rather than submit to the Type of Constans

The pope now moved forcefully against pro-Monothelite churchmen under his jurisdiction. He commissioned Bishop John of Philadelphia to appoint orthodox bishops, priests, and deacons in the patriarchates of Antioch and Jerusalem. Martin also deposed Archbishop John of Thessalonika and declared the appointments of Macarius of Antioch and Peter of Alexandria to be null and void.

Emperor Constans retaliated by having Martin kidnapped from Rome and taken as a prisoner to Constantinople. The pope still refused to accept either the Ecthesis or the Type, and he died a martyr in the Crimea in March 655. Other famous martyrs in the controversy include Maximus the Confessor (662), his disciple and fellow monk, Anastasius (662), and another Anastasius who was a papal envoy (666).

Patriarch Paul of Constantinople, meanwhile, died of natural causes. His successor, Peter, sent an ambiguous letter to Pope Eugenius, which made no mention of either one or two "operations," thus observing the prescription of the Type. In 663, Constans came to Rome, intending to make it his residence. The new pope, Vitalian, received him with all due honor, and Constans—who had refused to confirm the elections of Martin and Eugenius—ordered the name of Vitalian to be inscribed on the diptychs of Constantinople. No mention seems to have been made of the Type, and Constans soon retired to Sicily, where he was murdered in his bath in 668.

The Sixth Ecumenical Council

The new emperor, Constantine Pogonatus, does not seem to have enforced the Type, although it was not abolished. In 678, he summoned a general council to effect unity between the Eastern and Western churches. He wrote in this sense to Pope Donus (676-78), who had already died; but Pope Agatho convened a council at Rome toward this end. The emperor, for his part, sent the Monothelite Patriarch Theodore of Constantinople into exile, as he had become an obstacle to reunion.

Pope Agatho

The first session of the Sixth Ecumenical Council took place at Constantinople on November 7, 680, with Emperor Constantine Pogonatus presiding. Patriarch Macarius of Antioch was outspoken for Monothelitism, but with the emperor now opposed to this cause, Marcarius was condemned as a heretic. George, the new patriarch of Constantinople, generally upheld the Roman view. However, as Macarius had appealed to the late Pope Honorius, this pope was likewise condemned, a serious embarrassment to the papacy. The final decree of the council condemns the Ecthesis and the Type and several heretics, including Honorius, while affirming the letters of Pope Agatho and his council. As Agatho had died before receiving the results of the council, it fell to Pope Leo II to confirm it, and thus the churches of the East and West were once again united.

Monothelism still refused to die, however, and in 711, the imperial throne was seized by Philippicus Bardanes, who had been the pupil of the Monothelite monk Abbot Stephen, an associate of Macarius of Antioch. He restored to the diptychs the "heretics" Patriarch Sergius, Pope Honorius, and the others condemned by the Sixth Ecumenical Council. He also deposed Patriarch Cyrus of Constantinople and exiled a number of persons who refused to subscribe his condemnation of the council.

Then, in late May 713, Opsikian troops rebelled in Thrace. Several of their officers penetrated the imperial palace and blinded Philippicus on June 3, 713. Orthodoxy was soon restored by Anastasius II (713-15). This was, in effect, the end of Monothelitism as a major force.

Notable Figures in the Monothelite Debate

Saint Maximus the Confessor
  • Emperor Heraclius—Suggested "one operation" of Christ's will and promulgated the Echthesis as a compromise position, in effect banning the "orthodox" view as well as his own
  • Patriarch Sergius I of Constantinople—early supporter of the Monothelitism
  • Bishop Cyrus of Alexandria—promoter of Monothelitism as a means of unifying the African churches
  • Saint Sophrinius of Jerusalem—early leader of the opposition to Monothelitism
  • Pope Honorius I—Endorsed "one will" of Christ, for which he was condemned at Constantinople as a heretic
  • Emperor Constans II—Persecuted those who affirmed "two wills"
  • Pope Martin I—Martyred by Byzantine authorities for his condemnation of Monothelitism
  • Maximus the Confessor—Also martyred under Constans II for his opposition to Monothelitism
  • Pope Agatho—Opponent of Monothelitsm whose views were endorsed by the Sixth Ecumenical Council at Constantinople

See also

References
ISBN links support NWE through referral fees

  • Allen, Pauline, and Bronwen Neil. Maximus the Confessor and His Companions: Documents From Exile. Oxford early Christian texts. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 2002. ISBN 9780198299912.
  • Hardy, Edward Rochie, and Cyril Charles Richardson. Christology of the Later Fathers. Library of Christian classics, v. 3. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1977. ISBN 978-0664241520.
  • Hovorun, Cyril. Will, Action and Freedom: Christological Controversies in the Seventh Century. The medieval Mediterranean, v. 77. Leiden: Brill, 2008. ISBN 9789004166660.
  • Kaegi, Walter Emil. Heraclius, Emperor of Byzantium. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003. ISBN 9780521814591.
  • Neil, Bronwen. Seventh-Century Popes and Martyrs: The Political Hagiography of Anastasius Bibliothecarius. Studia antiqua australiensia, v. 2. Turnhout: Brepols, 2006. ISBN 9782503518879.

External links

All links retrieved November 9, 2022.

Credits

New World Encyclopedia writers and editors rewrote and completed the Wikipedia article in accordance with New World Encyclopedia standards. This article abides by terms of the Creative Commons CC-by-sa 3.0 License (CC-by-sa), which may be used and disseminated with proper attribution. Credit is due under the terms of this license that can reference both the New World Encyclopedia contributors and the selfless volunteer contributors of the Wikimedia Foundation. To cite this article click here for a list of acceptable citing formats.The history of earlier contributions by wikipedians is accessible to researchers here:

The history of this article since it was imported to New World Encyclopedia:

Note: Some restrictions may apply to use of individual images which are separately licensed.

Retrieved from https://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/p/index.php?title=Monothelitism&oldid=1086649

Content is available under Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License; additional terms may apply. See Terms of Use for details.
Copyright Logo
Powered by MediaWiki