Third Council of Constantinople: Edit history

Background

In 451 the Council of Chalcedon taught that Jesus Christ possesses two natures, divine and human, in one person. Many churches in Egypt and Syria, however, did not accept this decision, and the resulting conflict undermined the unity of the empire. In the early seventh century the Eastern Roman emperor Heraclius and Patriarch Sergius of Constantinople proposed a compromise to reconcile the two parties. First came Monoenergism, which held that Christ has two natures but a single activity (energeia); this was followed by Monothelitism, which held that he has a single will. In 638 an imperial edict known as the Ecthesis made Monothelitism official. In 648 Constans II issued an edict known as the Typos, which prohibited all debate on the question.

The Western church and some Eastern theologians opposed this compromise. In 649 Pope Martin I convened the Lateran Synod, which condemned Monothelitism. As a result, Martin I and the theologian Maximus the Confessor were arrested, and both died in exile. Maximus argued that if Christ is truly human, he must also possess a human will, and that this human will freely submits to the divine will.

Proceedings

Emperor Constantine IV convened the council to end the division between the Eastern and Western churches. It met from November 680 to September 681 in the domed hall of the imperial palace (the Trullus). Pope Agatho sent legates along with a letter setting out the Western position. Patriarch Macarius of Antioch defended Monothelitism at the council and was deposed.

The council declared that Christ possesses two wills and two activities, in accordance with his two natures. It affirmed that the two wills are not opposed to each other and that the human will submits to the divine will. This position is called Dyothelitism. Its supporters cited as a principal proof Christ's prayer in Gethsemane: "nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt" (Matthew 26:39). The council condemned Sergius, Cyrus of Alexandria, Pope Honorius I, and others for their association with Monothelitism.

Outcome and Influence

The council is regarded as having brought to a close the ancient Christological controversies that began with the Council of Nicaea. Neither this council nor the Second Council of Constantinople issued disciplinary canons. To remedy this, another council was held at the same location in 692, but it was never fully accepted in the West. In 711 Emperor Philippicus briefly revived Monothelitism, but it was abandoned again after he was removed from power.

The condemnation of Pope Honorius later became a matter of controversy. During the nineteenth-century debate over papal infallibility, opponents of the doctrine cited it as evidence that a pope could err. Catholic theologians have interpreted the condemnation as holding Honorius responsible not for teaching heresy but for negligence in responding to it.

Assessment

The Eastern Orthodox Church and the Catholic Church accept this council as the sixth ecumenical council. The so-called Oriental Orthodox churches, such as the Coptic Church and the Armenian Church, which do not accept the Council of Chalcedon, do not accept this council either.

Protestantism does not regard the decisions of councils as having the same authority as Scripture. Nevertheless, most denominations, including the Lutheran and Reformed churches, accept the council's Christological conclusions as orthodox doctrine consistent with Scripture. The council is rarely addressed directly in Korean churches, but seminary courses in church history and the history of doctrine discuss it when explaining the true humanity of Christ, that is, the meaning of the Incarnation.