Heresy of the Week: Monoenergism

Part two of this three week heresy series is the first attempt at "compromise" between the heresy of Monophysitism and orthodox Christianity.  We all know how well appeasement works, right?

Monoenergism is a 7^th century “compromise” heresy suggested to help heal the divide between Christians and Monophysitism.  The orthodox teaching is that Christ has two individual natures; Monophysitism teaches that there was only one nature in Christ, either divine or a synthesis of divine and human; Monoenergism attempted to bridge the gap through the vague term “energy”, saying that Christ had one “energy”.  Another attempt to solve this schism was through the introduction of Monothelitism, which also didn’t work, and was condemned along with Monoenergism and Monophysitism at the 680 Third Council of Constantinople.

Heresy of the Week: Monophysitism

This heresy begins a three week series on related heresy.  First up: one of the larger "ancient" heresies.

Monophysitism teaches that after the union of divine and human in the incarnation that there was only one nature in Christ—either divine (generally emphasized) or a synthesis of divine and human (as taught in Miaphysitism). This came into being after some rejected the 451 Council of Chalcedon, where Christ’s two natures were formally codified by the church. Members of the Oriental Orthodoxy Church, who believe in Miaphysitism, split from the main church over this distinction after the Council’s affirmation of two natures. Apollinarianism and Eutychianism are two major Monophystite heresies (although Apollinarianism predates Monophysitism), and Monophysitism is considered an overreaction in response to Nestorianism and their teaching that Christ was two separate people (the man and the divine), but really it is almost a better juxtaposition with Arianism’s denial of Christ’s divinity. It was condemned at the 680 Third Council of Constantinople, along with the two “compromised” composed as a “middle ground” to Monophysitism: Monoenergism and Monothelitism.

Heresy of the Week: Eutychianism and Miaphysitism

Because they are related, this week's heresy is a two-for-one: Eutychianism and Miaphysitism.  Both are subsets of Monophysitism, which, as the name might suggest, are heresies that teach Christ only having one nature (sometimes Divine, sometimes Human, and for a variety of reasons or by different means).

Eutychianism is a Monophysitism heresy. This sect teaches that the human nature of Christ was overcome by the divine aspects, or that His human nature was unlike the rest of humanity—it was often stressed that the unity of Christ’s nature was to such an extent that His divinity consumed His humanity. Eutyches (for whom this heresy is named) said that Christ was of two natures, but not in two natures (i.e. that he was homoousian with the Father, but not homoousian with His humanity). Eutychianism was condemned at the Council of Chalcedon in 451, where the Chalcedonian Creed was written to counter the Eutychian and Miaphysitism heresies. This reaction by the Council lead to the schism with the Oriental Orthodoxy Church.

Miaphysitism is a moderate form of Monophysitism (teaching that both natures are merged into one, rather than that the divine subsumes the human). After the 451 Council of Chalcedon, where the two natures of Christ were affirmed, this belief caused a split with the Oriental Orthodoxy Church (other issues, including political, were also at play), who still practice Miaphysitism today (although they object to that term being used to describe them).