What is monophysitism / Eutychianism?

Answer

Monophysitism is an erroneous or heretical view concerning the nature of Jesus Christ. Two schools of thought within monophysitism are Eutychianism and Apollinarianism. Monophysitism asserted that Christ possesses one nature—a divine one—rather than two. Eutychianism, in particular, claimed that Christ’s divine nature was so blended with His human nature that He was neither fully human nor fully divine. Both Eutychianism and monophysitism reject the biblical doctrine of the hypostatic union, which teaches that Christ’s two natures are united yet distinct. Eutychians adhered to the teachings of Eutyches (378–452), a fifth-century leader of a monastery in Constantinople; the term monophysitism is derived from a Greek word meaning “one nature.”

Eutychianism emerged in response to Nestorianism in the fifth century, which posited that Christ has two distinct natures, resulting in two distinct persons coexisting in one body. However, Eutyches, in his opposition to Nestorius, veered into heretical teachings. Eutyches claimed that Jesus’ humanity was essentially absorbed or obliterated by His divine nature, likening it to being “dissolved like a drop of honey in the sea.” An analogy that may clarify Eutyches’ viewpoint is a drop of ink added to a glass of water, resulting in a mixture that is neither pure water nor pure ink, but a blend of the two where both substances are altered in some manner. Essentially, this is what Eutyches professed regarding Christ’s natures. He believed that Christ’s human nature was assimilated into His divine nature in a manner that transformed both natures to some extent, giving rise to a third nature.

Monophysitism, including Eutychianism, exerted more influence in the Eastern Church than in the West. This doctrine was rejected at the Council of Chalcedon in AD 451. However, at one point in the late fifth century, the PatriarchThe leaders of the Eastern Orthodox Church attempted to reconcile monophysitism with orthodox teaching. However, no agreement could be reached, leading to the eventual excommunication of the monophysites. Despite this, monophysitism continued to be widely accepted in Syrian Antioch, Jerusalem, and Alexandria, Egypt.

Subsequently, some individuals proposed a compromise between monophysitism and orthodox theology known as monothelitism (derived from a Greek term meaning “one will”). Advocates of monothelitism asserted that Christ possessed two natures but only one (divine) will. This rejection of Jesus’ human will disregarded His own statement in Luke 22:42, and the compromise was unsuccessful, being rejected by both factions. Monophysites declined to embrace the concept of Christ’s two natures, and monothelitism was deemed heretical by the Third Council of Constantinople (680–681).

Certain churches today uphold a modified version of monophysitism referred to as miaphysitism or henophysitism. Miaphysitism teaches that Christ has one nature, which comprises two natures united in one entity “without mingling, without confusion, and without alteration” (from the Coptic divine liturgy). Oriental Orthodox churches, such as the Coptic Orthodox Church, adhere to miaphysite or non-Chalcedonian doctrine.

The common error shared by monophysitism and Eutychianism is the assertion that Christ possessed only one nature. The understanding of Christ’s nature is crucial in matters concerning the atonement. If Jesus had not been genuinely and completely human, He could not have served as a true substitute for humanity; and if He had not been truly and fully divine, His death would not have been able to atone for our sins.