Monothelitism — whether Christ has one will or two wills corresponding to his two natures
Constantinople III
680–681 ADConstantinople — held in the domed hall (Trullus) of the imperial palace
Third Council of Constantinople
The Third Council of Constantinople met fifty years after the death of Maximus the Confessor — the monk and theologian who had suffered exile, mutilation, and death defending Christ's two wills against the imperial-sponsored compromise of Monothelitism. The council vindicated Maximus's theology and condemned Monothelitism as a continuation of Nestorian and Eutychian errors into the domain of Christ's will. Remarkably, it condemned Pope Honorius I posthumously — the only case of a pope being condemned by an ecumenical council — for a letter that seemed to endorse 'one will' in Christ. The council's definition of Christ's two wills and two operations became the permanent completion of the Chalcedonian Christological synthesis.
Emperor Constantine IV
About 170 bishops, with strong papal representation
Outcome
What the council decided
The council condemned Monothelitism and its leaders: Patriarch Sergius of Constantinople, Patriarch Cyrus of Alexandria, Pope Honorius I of Rome, and others. It defined that Christ has two natural wills and two natural operations — divine and human — that are perfectly united in the one person without opposition or confusion. Christ's human will freely and perfectly obeys the Father's will without being destroyed or overridden by his divine will. The council formally rehabilitated Maximus the Confessor and vindicated his suffering.
Why it matters
The doctrine at stake
The Gethsemane scene is the council's theological center: 'Father, not my will but yours be done' (Luke 22:42). For Christ to say this with genuine human meaning, he must have a real human will — distinct from the Father's will and capable of alignment with it. If he had only a divine will, the prayer would be meaningless, a performance rather than a real act of human obedience. The council extends Gregory of Nazianzus's axiom from nature to will: 'What has not been assumed has not been healed' — if Christ lacks a human will, human willing itself is unredeemed. Human disobedience (Adam's will turning from God) is healed only by human obedience (Christ's will perfectly aligned with God). The council thus completes the Christological synthesis: one person, two natures, two wills, two operations — perfectly one in the unified act of the Son.
Council teaching
Two wills, one obedience: how the council completes Chalcedon
Chalcedon (451) had defined Christ as one person in two natures. But 'two natures' raised an immediate further question: if Christ has two natures — divine and human — does he have two natural operations (energies) and two natural wills? The Alexandrian tradition was suspicious: two wills seemed to imply two subjects, sliding back toward Nestorianism. Some theologians proposed the formula 'one energy' (Monenergism) or 'one will' (Monothelitism) as a way to protect Chalcedonian unity.
Monothelitism was not simply a theological error invented by its proponents. It was a political compromise designed by Patriarch Sergius of Constantinople and approved by Emperor Heraclius in the Ekthesis of 638 to win Oriental Orthodox communities (who were mostly Monophysite) back to imperial communion, particularly in Egypt and Syria — territories under urgent threat from the Persian and then Islamic invasions. The political stakes were enormous. The theological compromise seemed manageable.
Maximus the Confessor (580–662) was the one theologian who refused to accept the compromise. A highly educated monk and former imperial secretary, Maximus understood that 'one will' was not merely a formula but a theological position with devastating consequences. He developed the key distinction: Christ's human will is not a separate center of decision-making (which would imply two subjects) but it is a genuine faculty of the human nature — and it freely, perfectly, and joyfully wills what the divine will wills. The unity is not the unity of one will but the unity of two wills in perfect agreement.
For this position, Maximus was arrested, tried for treason (opposing the imperial theological policy), had his tongue cut out and his right hand amputated, and was exiled to Georgia where he died in 662. He is venerated as 'the Confessor' and one of the greatest theologians in Christian history. The council of 680 vindicated him fully and adopted his theological framework almost entirely.
The condemnation of Pope Honorius I was unprecedented and remains theologically significant. Honorius had written a letter to Patriarch Sergius in 634 using the phrase 'one will' in a context that seemed to support Monothelitism. Whether he meant to endorse the heresy or simply to advocate theological peace by discouraging debate is disputed. The council condemned him for 'allowing the stainless rule of the apostolic tradition to be soiled.' This condemnation has been used in debates about papal infallibility: how can the council condemn a pope if popes are infallible? The First Vatican Council (1870) distinguished between a pope speaking ex cathedra in formal definitions of faith and a pope writing personal letters — only the former falls under the infallibility charism.
Controversy explained
The political origins of Monothelitism and the suffering of Maximus
To understand why Monothelitism developed, you have to understand the catastrophe facing the Byzantine Empire in the early 7th century. In 614, the Persians captured Jerusalem and carried off the True Cross. Egypt was lost to Persia in 618. The Arab conquests beginning in 634 would take Syria, Palestine, and Egypt permanently. These were the heartlands of Oriental Orthodox Christianity — Monophysite territory that had been in schism from Constantinople since Chalcedon in 451.
If the Byzantines could reunite the Chalcedonian and Monophysite churches, they would have a more unified Christian population in these territories. Monothelitism was the theological price tag: accept Chalcedon's two natures but agree that the one person has only one will. This seemed to satisfy the Monophysite concern for unity while maintaining the two-natures language. Patriarch Cyrus of Alexandria implemented the policy in Egypt with significant success — many Coptic Christians temporarily returned to communion. Then the Arab conquest overwhelmed the whole project before it could be tested.
The condemnation of the compromise took place after the political emergency had passed. By 680, the Arab conquests had permanently settled the question of reuniting the Oriental Orthodox — the eastern provinces were no longer Byzantine. Emperor Constantine IV, who had been working on normalizing relations with Rome after decades of conflict, convened the council partly to restore East-West theological communion. The condemnation of Monothelitism served this diplomatic purpose while also vindicating the theological tradition of Maximus.
The council's treatment of Maximus's legacy was moving. The man who had been mutilated and exiled for his theology was posthumously vindicated as a confessor and defender of orthodoxy. His formula — 'Christ's human will is not contrary to the divine will but follows it, cleaving to it and moved by it freely, not under compulsion' — was adopted as the council's teaching.
The council also condemned Patriarch Macarius of Antioch, who was a practicing Monothelite present at the council. Unlike the posthumous condemnations, Macarius was deposed in person — one of the few occasions where a sitting patriarch was tried and removed by an ecumenical council.
Study path
How to understand it
Begin at Gethsemane
Luke 22:42 — 'Father, not my will but yours be done.' Read this passage with the question: does Christ have a genuine human will here, or is this a kind of theatrical gesture? The council's answer is that the human will is absolutely real and its free obedience to the Father is what heals human disobedience.
Read Maximus the Confessor's Opuscula Theologica et Polemica
Maximus's short theological and polemical writings are the most direct source of the council's theology. His distinction between natural will (thelema physikon) and gnomic will (thelema gnomikon) is the key philosophical breakthrough of the controversy.
Understand the political origins of Monothelitism
Monothelitism was not born in a theological library but in the crisis of the Byzantine Empire facing Persia and Islam. Understanding this helps you evaluate the intentions of its proponents — they were trying to save the Church's unity under extreme duress, not simply inventing heresy.
Study the Honorius I condemnation carefully
The condemnation of a pope by a council is theologically significant. Engage with how Catholic theology has interpreted this — the distinction between formal definitional acts and personal letters — and what Orthodox and Protestant theologians have made of it.
Connect to salvation and human anthropology
The council's deepest implication is for anthropology: if Christ's human will is genuinely healed through perfect obedience, then human willing — historically the site of Adam's fall — is capable of redemption. The council completes the doctrine of salvation by addressing the will, not just the nature.
Reception
How the traditions receive it
Catholic
Received as the sixth ecumenical council and essential for Christology. The posthumous condemnation of Pope Honorius I is acknowledged and has been addressed in Catholic theology through the distinction between informal papal letters and formal ex cathedra definitions. The council's Christology is authoritative. Maximus the Confessor is venerated as a Doctor of the Church.
Eastern Orthodox
Received as the Sixth Holy Ecumenical Council and theologically central. Maximus the Confessor is one of the most revered theologians in Orthodox history — his vision of human will freely aligned with the divine will is foundational for Orthodox anthropology and the theology of theosis. The council completes the Chalcedonian definition for Orthodox theology.
Protestant
Accepted in classical Christology where the full humanity — including human willing — is affirmed. Luther's and Calvin's insistence on Christ's genuine human suffering and intercession presupposes the reality of Christ's human will. The condemnation of Honorius I has been cited in Protestant polemics against papal infallibility.
Oriental Orthodox
Not received as ecumenical. The Oriental Orthodox churches are not bound by the post-Chalcedonian council sequence. However, many Oriental Orthodox theologians would affirm the substance of the council's teaching about Christ's full humanity and the reality of his human willing — since this was also Cyril's position.
Key terms
Words to know
Monothelitism
The teaching that Christ has only one will — the divine will — in order to preserve the unity of his person. Condemned by the council as denying the full reality of Christ's human nature, including human willing.
Dyothelitism
The orthodox teaching defined at the council: Christ has two natural wills — divine and human — corresponding to his two natures, united without opposition in the one person. The human will freely and perfectly follows the divine will.
Monenergism
The predecessor of Monothelitism: the teaching of 'one energy' or 'one operation' in Christ, proposed by Patriarch Sergius before the Ekthesis. Condemned along with Monothelitism as denying Christ's full human nature.
Maximus the Confessor
Monk and theologian (580–662) who resisted Monothelitism at the cost of his tongue and right hand, dying in exile. Vindicated by the council and venerated as 'the Confessor.' His theology of two wills in perfect union became the council's framework.
Honorius I
Pope of Rome 625–638, whose letter to Patriarch Sergius used the phrase 'one will' in a way condemned by the council as supporting Monothelitism. The only pope to be condemned by an ecumenical council. The condemnation has been significant in debates over papal infallibility.
Gethsemane Argument
The council's central scriptural argument: Christ's prayer 'Father, not my will but yours be done' (Luke 22:42) requires a genuine human will distinct from the Father's will and capable of free obedience to it. Without a human will, the prayer would have no real meaning.
Ekthesis (638)
The imperial document issued by Emperor Heraclius at Patriarch Sergius's suggestion, imposing Monothelitism on the Church as the required theological formula. Condemned by Popes Severinus and John IV. Later repudiated by Emperor Constans II who replaced it with the Typos (648), forbidding all theological discussion of wills and energies.
Scripture
Biblical connections
Matthew 26:39Luke 22:42John 6:38John 4:34Hebrews 5:7-9Hebrews 10:5-7
Continue study