Information on the thesis

Monothelitism is a doctrine according to which Jesus Christ has one will
common for his human and divine natures. Monothelitism evolved from a former
Christological doctrine known as Monenergism which declared that Christ performed
both human and divine deeds through one divine-human operation.
The Christianity of the Byzantine Empire was divided mainly into
Chalcedonian and Monophysite branches. The discord among bishops and religious
leaders eventually entered the social and political spheres of the Byzantine Empire.
This prompted Emperor Heraclius (610–641) and Patriarch Sergius (610–638) to
search for the Christological solution which would provide the common sense of
identity. The acceptance of a common Christological doctrine – Monenergism – was
planned as an expected result of the compromise. However, majority of
Monophysites perceived the Monenergism as a threat for their faith and, accordingly,
for their religious identity.
Unexpectedly for the Emperor and the Patriarch, the most explicable reaction
to Monenergism came from the Chalcedonian circle, represented by the monk
Sophronius (c. 560–638), who expressed his protest before Patriarch Sergius. In
response, Sergius banned the discussions concerning one or two operations, in order
to avoid contention. Patriarch Sergius claimed that talking of two operations in Christ
leads to the conclusion that there are two wills in mutual conflict.
Immediately after 633, the tension between Sergius’ ambiguity and
Sophronius’ exactness in terminology brought about a big crisis. The discussion over
operations in Christ became the problem of the universal Church. Pope Honorius
(625–638) wrote a letter, in which he formulated a confession of one will in Christ
that became the core of the doctrine of Monothelitism.
Sophronius’ opposition to Monenergism was strongly supported by his
disciple, Maximus the Confessor (c. 580–662). He made a clear statement on human
operation in Christ as a natural operation of his humanity. At that time the adherents
of one operation found support of their idea in the person of Emperor Heraclius who
promulgated an edict Ekthesis, in which he repeated the ideas of Patriarch Sergius.
By the end of the 640s, the territories of the Empire, for the sake of which
Monothelitism was advanced, were lost to Christianity. Patriarch Paul (642–653)
convinced Emperor Constans II (641–668) to issue the edict Typos (648) that forbade
any discussion on either one or two activities or wills in Christ. However, the Roman
Church and its allies kept demonstrating the doctrinal precision in accordance with
Pope Leo’s Christology and the Chalcedonian Definition of Faith. The adherents of
Monothelitism continued to emphasize the unity of one operating Christ but in the
mode of one and two operations.
Monothelites tried to present the confrontation as the controversy over phrases,
which hurts the oikonomia (arrangement), that is, the unity of the Church for the sake
of the Empire. The Dyothelites cherished the principle of akribeia: in order that faith
was rightly believed, there should be a precision in its expression.
Because of the fact that the principle of oikonomia involved imperial politics,
the polemic was rooted also in the political ideology in regard to the role of the
Emperor in the Church. The Monothelites claimed that the doctrine promoted by the
Emperor is true. The Dyothelites claimed that the doctrine is orthodox, if it is
confirmed by the Roman See, not by the Emperor. Accordingly, the dispute over
phrases led to the vivid discussion over the doctrinal primacy in the Christianity.
The crisis led to important question of Christian identity. For the adherents of
the official ideology of power, being a true Christian implied unconditional fidelity to
the Emperor. For the Dyothelites, being a Christian implied maintaining in the true
faith defined by the collegium of bishops united with the Roman pontiff.
The Monothelite controversy was not only theological debate on the political
background but also, and predominantly, the collision of Christian identities. The
ecclesial Christian identity prevailed during and after the third Council in
Constantinople. This identity rested on the purity of the faith and the
acknowledgement of the supreme doctrinal authority of the five Patriarchs
(Pentarchy).
The crystallization of a new sense of Christian identity to some extent changed
the trend of history. The idea of Pentarchy was the decisive factor that made the
attempts of the Union between Rome and Eastern Church at the Council of Lyon
(1274) and that of Ferrara-Florence (1438-1439) unsuccessful.
Keywords: Monothelitism, Monenergism, Christology, Church, Empire,
Politics, Power, Ideology, Identity, Pentarchy.