THE NEW SCHAFF-HERZOG
noetse, must have caused no little excitement, for even toward the end of the sixth century the orthodox monks in Palestine are found communicating on the subject with the papal legate in Constantinople, who not only reported the matter to Gregory I., but requested a formal pronouncement from Eulogius, the orthodox patriarch of Alexandria. It was going wholly beyond the bounds of Monophysitism in the strict sense when Stephen Niobes, an Alexandrian sophist, was driven by his feeling of the contradiction between the asserted unity of nature and the attempted maintenance of natural differences between the divine and human to say that after the incarnation there was in Christ no distinction of natures whatever. Against him and his followers, called Niobites, the Patriarch Damianus and Peter of Antioch (Peter of Callinicus) came forward decidedly. Besides all these differences, the Monophysite party was disturbed also by the Tritheistic Controversy (q.v.).
For convenience in following the course of the developments, the following dates of the patriarchs of Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem are given. Constantinople: Anatolius, Aug. (?), 449-July 3, 458; Gennadius to Sept. (?), 471; Acacius to the end (?) of 489; Fravitas till spring, 490; Euphemius probably till the summer of 496; Macedonius II. till Aug. 7, 511; Timothy I. till Apr. 5 (?), 518; John II. of Cappadocia, Apr. 17-Feb., 520; Epiphanius Feb. 25, 520-June 5, 535; Anthimus to Mar., 536; Mennas Mar. 13, 536-August, 552; Eutychius till Jan. 22, 565; John III. Scholasticus till probably Aug. 31, 577; Eutychius till Apr. 12, 582; John the Faster till Sept. 2, 595.
Alexandria: Proterius Nov., 451- (probably) Mar. 28, 457; Timotheus iElurus till the beginning of 460; Timotheus Salophakiolus, June, 460-Nov., 475; Timotheus ^lurus till July 31, 477; Petrus Mongus till Sept. 4, 477; Timotheus Salophaciolus till probably June, 482; John I. Tabennesiotes till the end of 482; Petrus Mongus till May, 490; Athanasius II. May, 490-Sept. 17, 496; John II. Hemula, 496-Apr. 29, 505; John III. Nikiotes till May 22, 515 (516); Dioscurus II. till Oct. 14, 517 (518); Timothy IV. till Feb. 8, 535 (536); Theodosius I. Feb., 10-11, 535 (536); Gaian, Feb. 10-May 23, 535 (536); Theodosius I. July, 535- (probably) 537 or 538 (Jan., 540); Paul, 539? (541)- Easter, 542 (543 at the latest); Zoilus till 551 (550); Apollinarius, 551 (550)-569; Peter IV., 576- Jan. 19, 578; Damianus, July, 578- June 12, 605.
Antioch: Maximus 449-Mar., 455(7); Basil 456(?)-458; Acacius 458-459(?); Martyrius 460(?H170(?); Peter the Fuller 468 (? 470)-471; Julian 471-475-476; Peter the Fuller 475-6-476-7 (477-8); John 477 (478); Stephen 478- 481 (?); Calandion 481-2-485; Peter the Fuller 485-488 (?); Palladius 488 (?)-498; Flavian 498 (499)-512; Severus Nov. 6, 512-Sept. 29 (?), 518; Paul II. end of May, 519-May 1, 521; Euphrasius 521-May 29, 526; Ephraem 526-545; Domnus III. 545-559.
Jerusalem, according to Diekamp: Juvenal 422-458 Anastasius beginning of July, 458-beginning of Jan., 478 Martyrius 478-Apr. 13, 486; Sallust Apr. ,486-July 23, 494 Elias 494-Aug., 516; John I. Sept., 516-Apr. 20, 524; Peter 524-beginning of Oct., 532; Macarius Oct.-Dec, 552; Eustochius Dec, 552-563 (564); Macarius 563 (564)-c. 575.
(G. Kruger.)
Bibliography: The principal sources are: (l)The acts of the synods named in the text, to be consulted in the works of Mansi and Hefele (the latter is available here in Eng. and Fr. transls.). (2) The letters and deliverances of the popes, such as are collected in A. Theil, Epistolce Romanorum pontiflcum vitce, vol. i., Brunsberg, 1868; Jaffe\ Regesta, vol. i. (3) Histories: Evagrius, Hist, eccl., Eng. trans]., London, 1898; John of Antioch, in C. Muller's Fragmenta, Paris, 1870; John of Nijion, in H. Zotenberg's article in J A, 7 ser., xii (1878), 245-347; John Malalas, Chronographia, xiv.-xviii.; Nicephorus Callistus, Hist, eccl.; Procopius, Hist, arcana, in CSHB, 1833; Theodore Lector, in MPG, lxxxvi. 1, pp. 165-228; Liberatus, in MPL, lxviii. 963-1096; Marcellinus Comes in T.
Mommsen, MGH, Chron. min., ii (1894). The Syrian Chronicle of Zachariah of Mitylene, London, 1899; the " Commentary " of John of Ephesus, in Latin, Amsterdam, 1889; The Chronicle of Joshua Stylite, text and Eng. transl., ed. W. Wright, Cambridge, 1882; John of Majuma (cf. F. Nau, in Revue de i 'orient chretien, iii. 232- 259, 337-392); Timothy the Presbyter, in MPG, lxxxvi. 1, pp. 11—74; Select Letters of Severus, Patriarch of Antioch 508-618, 4 parts, London, 1902-04; Corpus scriptorum Christianorum orientalium, note especially vol. xxv., Vitce virorum apud Monophysitas celeberrimorum, part 1, text, ed. E. W. Brooks, and vol. xxxvii., Documenta ad origines Monophy sitarum illustrandos, ed. J. B. Chabot, Paris and Leipsic, 1907-08; Timotheus .lElurus, Widerlegung der auf der Synode zu Chalcedon festgesetzten Lehre, Armenian text with preface, ed. K. Ter-Mekrttschian and E. Ter-Minassiantz, Leipsic, 1908.
The subject is treated in the works on the history of doctrine, see Doctrine, History of; in the literature under Alexandria, School of; Antioch, School or; and in the works on the church history of the period. Consult further: G. Kruger, Monophy sitische Streitigkeiten, Leipsic, 1884; S. A. Assemani, Bibliotheca orientalis, vols, i.— ii., Rome, 1719-21 (valuable); M. Le Quien, Oriens Christianus, 3 vols., Paris, 1762—65; F. C. Baur, Die christliche Lehre von der Dreieinigkeit, ii. 37-96, Tubingen, 1842; I. A. Dorner, Person Christi, ii. 150-193, 5 parts, Berlin, 1845-63, Eng. transl., 5 vols., Edinburgh, 1861-63; H. G. Kleyn, Het leven van Johannes van Telia door Elias, Leyden, 1882; idem, Bijdrage tot de Kerkgeschiedenis van het Oosten durende de 6. eeuw, Utrecht, 1891; J. C. L. Gieseler, Commentatio: M onophysitarum veterum variaz . opiniones, 2 vols., Gottingen, 1835-38; J. Langen, Geschichte der rbmischen Kirche von Leo I. bis Nikolaus I., Bonn, 1885; G. A. Rose, Kaiser Anastasius I., vol. i., Halle, 1882, vol. ii., Wohlau, 1888; J. B. Bury, Hist, of the Later Roman Empire, 2 vols., London, 1889; A. von Gutschmid, Kleine Schriften, ii. 395-525, Leipsic, 1890; H. Gelzer, in Byzantinische Zeitschrift, i (1892), 34-49; idem, in Krumbacher, Geschichte, pp. 911 sqq.; A. Knecht, Die Religionspolitik Justinians, i., Wiirzburg, 1896; W. H. Hutton, The Church of the Sixth Century, London, 1897; F. Diekamp, Die origenistischen Streitigkeiten und das 5. okumenische Konzil, Minister, 1899; O. Baumstark, in Oriens Christianus, ii (1902), 151-169, 358-389; F. Schmid, in ZKT, xxx. 2 (1902); J. Pargoire, L'Eglise byzantine 627-847, Paris, 1905; Gibbon, Decline and Fall, chap, xlvii.; DCB, iii. 308-320; KL, viii. 1781-1797.
MONOTHELITES, men'eth-el-aits.
Rise under Sergius (§1).
Union of Monophysites and Monothelites (§ 2).
The Statement of Sophronius; the Ektheeis (§ 3).
Rising Opposition to the Doctrine (§ 4).
The Trullan Councils (§ 5).
Basis in Patristic Dogmatics (§ 6).
Relation to New-Testament Statements (§ 7).
The Monothelites owe their origin to an attempt to bridge over the difference between the orthodox position based on the decrees of the Council of Chalcedon and the Monophysite principles (see
Monophysites), which had caused a
i. Rise schism in the Eastern Church. The
under impulse to this reconciliation was two-
Sergius. fold. During the age of Justinian the
development of theology had tended toward the Christology of Cyril to whom the Monophysites had always appealed. The Emperor Heraclius (610-641) had political reasons for encouraging the movement. The Asiatic provinces of the empire were being invaded both by the Persians and the Arabs, and it was necessary to consolidate the population for defense. The emperor was powerfully supported by the Patriarch Sergius (q.v.), whose sympathies were with the program of union from the first. It was theological discussion in Alexandria that first brought to the front the terms " one energy " and " one will " or at