This month we celebrate our 25th Anniversary - We Thank the Lord for You.

We are delighted that you use the free resources available at Monergism. Our mission is to provide open access to scripturally sound and theologically rich Christian literature, ensuring cost is never a barrier to building a robust Christian library. While these resources are free to all, sustaining this ministry requires funding.

Last year, over 1 million new visitors accessed our resources. Given that less than 1% of readers donate, we humbly ask you to consider supporting this ministry. If everyone reading this gave just $5, we could meet our 2024 budget in no time.

Every contribution makes a difference - whether it's a monthly gift of $20 or a one-time donation of $10, $25, $100, or more. You can also read our business plan to see how your gifts are used to further this mission.

Monergism (CPRF) is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization, and all donations are tax-deductible.

Donate

Monophysitism

Monophysitism is a Christological heresy that arose in the 5th century, which teaches that Jesus Christ has only one nature (mono-physitism, from Greek monos, meaning "one," and physis, meaning "nature"). According to Monophysitism, Christ’s divine and human natures were fused into a single nature, usually with the divine nature overwhelming or absorbing the human nature. This belief is considered heretical by orthodox Christianity because it denies the true and full humanity of Jesus Christ.

History of Monophysitism

  1. Context in Early Christological Debates: Monophysitism emerged out of the early Christological controversies about how to properly understand the relationship between the divine and human natures of Christ. The Council of Nicaea (325 AD) had affirmed Christ's full divinity against the Arian heresy, and the Council of Constantinople (381 AD) had confirmed the doctrine of the Trinity. However, debates continued about how the divine and human natures of Christ were united in one person.

  2. Eutychianism and the Rise of Monophysitism: The main proponent of Monophysitism was Eutyches (c. 380–456 AD), an archimandrite (abbot) of a monastery in Constantinople. Eutyches, reacting to Nestorianism (which divided Christ into two separate persons), taught that after the incarnation, Christ had only one nature. He argued that Christ’s human nature was absorbed into His divine nature, much like a drop of honey dissolving into the ocean. This view denied that Christ maintained a true human nature after the union of His divinity and humanity.

    Eutyches’ teaching came to be known as Eutychianism or Monophysitism and was seen as an extreme reaction to Nestorianism, which had emphasized the distinction between Christ’s divine and human natures to the point of dividing them. Eutyches was initially condemned at a synod in Constantinople in 448 AD, but the controversy escalated when his views were defended at the infamous Robber Council of Ephesus in 449 AD, which attempted to vindicate Monophysitism.

  3. Council of Chalcedon (451 AD): To settle the growing Christological disputes, the Council of Chalcedon was convened in 451 AD. This council decisively rejected Monophysitism and affirmed the doctrine of the hypostatic union—the belief that Jesus Christ is one person in two distinct natures, divine and human, without confusion, change, division, or separation. The Chalcedonian Definition declared that the two natures of Christ are perfectly united in one person, while remaining fully divine and fully human.

    Monophysitism was condemned as heretical because it compromised Christ’s true humanity by effectively merging His human nature into His divine nature, which would undermine the reality of His incarnation and His ability to fully represent humanity.

  4. Post-Chalcedonian Schisms: Despite the ruling at Chalcedon, many Christians, particularly in Egypt, Syria, and Armenia, rejected the council’s decision and continued to hold to Monophysitism. These groups became known as Oriental Orthodox Churches (which includes the Coptic Orthodox Church, the Syriac Orthodox Church, and the Armenian Apostolic Church), and they formed a distinct branch of Christianity that rejected the Chalcedonian Christology. These churches often prefer the term Miaphysitism (emphasizing "one united nature") to distinguish themselves from the more extreme Monophysitism of Eutyches, though the distinction remains a matter of ongoing theological dialogue.

Theology of Monophysitism

Monophysitism holds to the belief that Christ has only one nature, typically a divine nature that has absorbed or subsumed His human nature. Key theological features of Monophysitism include:

  1. One Composite Nature: Monophysitism teaches that after the incarnation, the divine and human natures of Christ were fused into a single, composite nature. This single nature was often described as predominantly divine, with the human nature being overshadowed or diminished. In Eutyches’ view, Christ was of “two natures before the union, but after the union, one nature,” meaning that the human nature was absorbed into the divine.

  2. Denial of Christ's True Humanity: By teaching that Christ's human nature was absorbed by His divine nature, Monophysitism effectively denies that Jesus Christ had a complete human nature like ours. This raises serious problems for the doctrine of the incarnation and the atonement, as the New Testament teaches that Jesus had to be fully human to redeem humanity (Hebrews 2:17). If Christ did not truly possess human nature, He could not represent humanity or provide the perfect, substitutionary sacrifice for sin.

  3. Reaction Against Nestorianism: Monophysitism was, in part, an overreaction to the heresy of Nestorianism, which had emphasized the separation between Christ's divine and human natures to the point of dividing Him into two persons. Monophysitism sought to preserve the unity of Christ, but in doing so, it collapsed the distinction between His two natures, leading to the opposite error.

Why Monophysitism is Heretical

Monophysitism was rejected by the early church as heretical because it undermines the true nature of the incarnation and distorts the biblical understanding of Christ’s person. Key reasons for this condemnation include:

  1. Denial of the Hypostatic Union: Monophysitism denies the orthodox doctrine of the hypostatic union, which teaches that Christ is one person with two distinct natures—divine and human. The Council of Chalcedon in 451 AD affirmed that these two natures exist “without confusion, without change, without division, and without separation.” Monophysitism, by teaching that the divine nature absorbed the human nature, either confuses or eliminates the human nature of Christ.

  2. Undermining Christ’s Role as Mediator: Scripture teaches that Christ is the perfect mediator between God and humanity (1 Timothy 2:5) because He is fully God and fully man. Monophysitism compromises this role by effectively denying Christ’s full humanity. If Christ does not fully possess a human nature, He cannot truly represent humanity, and His death on the cross would not be the true substitutionary atonement required for human salvation (Hebrews 2:14-17).

  3. Contradiction of Scripture: The New Testament clearly affirms both the full divinity and full humanity of Christ. For example, John 1:14 states, “The Word became flesh,” affirming that the eternal Son of God took on human nature. Philippians 2:6-8 describes how Christ, being in the form of God, humbled Himself by becoming human. Monophysitism, by denying or minimizing Christ's human nature, contradicts these scriptural teachings about the incarnation.

  4. Rejection by Ecumenical Councils: Monophysitism was condemned by the Council of Chalcedon in 451 AD, which defined the doctrine of the hypostatic union and rejected both Monophysitism and Nestorianism. The Chalcedonian Definition became the standard for orthodox Christology and remains foundational for Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, and Protestant theology.

Historic Christian Orthodox View

The historic Christian view, as articulated by the Council of Chalcedon, affirms the doctrine of the hypostatic union, which states that Jesus Christ is one person with two distinct natures—fully divine and fully human.

  1. Two Natures, One Person: In the Chalcedonian Definition, Christ is described as being one person (or hypostasis) in two natures—one divine and one human. These two natures are united in the person of Christ without confusion, without change, without division, and without separation. This means that Christ’s divine nature and human nature remain distinct, yet they exist together in perfect union in one person.

  2. Full Divinity and Full Humanity: The orthodox view maintains that Christ is fully God and fully man. His divine nature is eternal and unchanging, while His human nature is fully real, possessing all the characteristics of true humanity, yet without sin. Christ’s full humanity is essential for His role as the second Adam (1 Corinthians 15:45), redeeming humanity through His life, death, and resurrection.

  3. The Role of Christ as Mediator: Orthodox theology teaches that Christ, as fully divine and fully human, is the perfect mediator between God and humanity (1 Timothy 2:5). His human nature allows Him to represent humanity, while His divine nature ensures that His sacrifice has infinite value and power. This dual nature makes Christ’s redemptive work on the cross effective for the salvation of all who believe.

  4. Salvation through the Incarnation: The incarnation—the Word becoming flesh (John 1:14)—is central to Christian theology because it is through the incarnation that God reconciles humanity to Himself. Christ’s true and full humanity is essential to this work of salvation, as He had to become like us in every way, except for sin, in order to redeem us (Hebrews 4:15).

Modern-Day Implications and Distinctions

Monophysitism in its original form is not widely held today, but some Oriental Orthodox Churches (such as the Coptic Orthodox Church and the Armenian Apostolic Church) historically embraced what they call Miaphysitism, which can be distinguished from the more extreme Monophysitism of Eutyches. Miaphysitism teaches that Christ has "one united nature out of two," emphasizing the unity of His natures without denying that His human and divine natures are fully present.

Over the centuries, dialogues between Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox theologians have sought to clarify the differences between Miaphysitism and Monophysitism, with some progress in mutual understanding. While Miaphysitism differs from Chalcedonian Christology in its terminology, it seeks to avoid the errors of Eutychian Monophysitism by affirming the reality of both Christ’s divinity and humanity.

Conclusion

Monophysitism is a Christological heresy that teaches that Christ has only one nature, typically understood as a divine nature that absorbs or overwhelms His human nature. This view was condemned by the Council of Chalcedon in 451 AD, which affirmed the doctrine of the hypostatic union, declaring that Christ is one person with two distinct natures—divine and human—united without confusion, change, division, or separation. The historic Christian orthodox view maintains that Christ’s full humanity and full divinity are both essential for His role as the Savior and mediator between God and humanity. Monophysitism was rejected because it compromised Christ’s true humanity, undermining the incarnation and the work of salvation.

By Topic

Joy

By Scripture

Old Testament

Genesis

Exodus

Leviticus

Numbers

Deuteronomy

Joshua

Judges

Ruth

1 Samuel

2 Samuel

1 Kings

2 Kings

1 Chronicles

2 Chronicles

Ezra

Nehemiah

Esther

Job

Psalms

Proverbs

Ecclesiastes

Song of Solomon

Isaiah

Jeremiah

Lamentations

Ezekiel

Daniel

Hosea

Joel

Amos

Obadiah

Jonah

Micah

Nahum

Habakkuk

Zephaniah

Haggai

Zechariah

Malachi

New Testament

Matthew

Mark

Luke

John

Acts

Romans

1 Corinthians

2 Corinthians

Galatians

Ephesians

Philippians

Colossians

1 Thessalonians

2 Thessalonians

1 Timothy

2 Timothy

Titus

Philemon

Hebrews

James

1 Peter

2 Peter

1 John

2 John

3 John

Jude

Revelation

By Author

Latest Links