Editing Monothelitism (section)

==First attempt: Doctrine of one energy==
[[File:Cherub plaque Louvre MRR245 n2.jpg|left|thumb|Emperor [[Heraclius]], who defeated Persian King [[Khosrau II]] in this [[allegory]], had a desire to secure internal harmony within his empire that made him adopt the doctrine of monothelitism.]]
[[Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople|Patriarch]] [[Sergius I of Constantinople]] was the driving force behind this doctrine, with the full blessing of Emperor Heraclius.{{sfn|Brauer|1971|pp=568–569}} Coming to the imperial throne in 610, the patriarch had long since converted the emperor to the new doctrine as by 622, Heraclius had communicated with Bishop [[Paul of Armenia]] where the emperor asserted that the energy, or the active force, of Christ was single. That doctrine of ''[[monoenergism]]'' was the precursor of monotheletism.{{sfn|Bury|1889|p=250}}

Heraclius's interest then focused on Armenia, and it was probably then that the emperor decided to use monoenergism as a political weapon to reconcile the Non-Chalcedonian Church of Armenia with the Imperial Church.{{sfn|Bury|1889|p=250}} To help bring that about, a [[synod]] was held in 622 at [[Theodosiopolis (Armenia)|Theodosiopolis]], called the Synod of Garin, where monoenergism was discussed. Over the next few years Heraclius was preoccupied with his prosecution of the war against the [[Sassanids]], but by 626, he had issued a decree to Arcadius, Bishop of [[Cyprus]], requesting him to teach the doctrine of "one hegumenic energy". By all accounts, that was met with notable success, particularly as there was then a large colony of Armenians on the island,{{sfn|Bury|1889|p=251}} which encouraged Heraclius to attempt to seek a wider approval of his compromise. In 626, he asked Patriarch Sergius to approach Cyrus, Bishop of [[Phasis (town)|Phasis]], to secure his cooperation.

With the successful conclusion to the Persian War, Heraclius could devote more time to promoting his compromise, which was now more urgent because of the administration of the recovered monophysite (also referred to as "non-Chalcedonian" for rejecting of that particular council) provinces of Syria and Egypt. In 629, a meeting took place between the emperor and Athanasius the Jacobite at [[Hierapolis]]. An agreement was struck in which the Jacobites were to return to the Imperial Church on the basis of the single energy doctrine, and Athanasius was to be made [[Patriarch of Antioch]]. In 630, Bishop [[Cyrus of Alexandria|Cyrus]] was made [[Patriarch of Alexandria]], who soon won over another non-Chalcedonian group. Very soon, three of the five patriarchates (Constantinople, Antioch and Alexandria) were teaching Christ's "one theandric energy".{{sfn|Bury|1889|p=251}}

Not everyone was convinced, particularly a monk of [[Palestine (region)|Palestine]] named [[Sophronius of Jerusalem|Sophronius]], who believed that there was something unsound in the doctrine and so became the champion of dyothelitism, the doctrine of the two wills of Christ. He was concerned that for the sake of ecclesiastical unity, doctrinal expressions were being compromised.{{sfn|Bury|1889|p=252}} For the first few years, Patriarch Sergius of Constantinople managed to keep him silent, but when Sophronius was appointed as [[Greek Orthodox Patriarch of Jerusalem|Patriarch of Jerusalem]] in 634, he used his newfound position of authority to challenge the validity of the doctrine of monoenergism.

Determined to prevent that formidable challenge to his Christological compromise, Sergius wrote to [[Pope Honorius I]] (625–638) at Rome to ask him to endorse a position that Church unity should not be endangered by having any discussions or disputes over whether Christ had one energy or two. Sergius added that the doctrine of two energies could lead to the erroneous belief that Jesus has two conflicting wills.{{sfn|Hefele|1896|p=25}} Honorius's reply in 635 endorsed that view that all discussions should cease and agreed that Jesus has only one will, not two conflicting wills, since Jesus assumed not the vitiated human nature, tainted by Adam's fall, but human nature as it existed prior to Adam's fall.{{sfn|Hefele|1896|pp=29–30}} In the meantime the ''epistola synodica'' of Sophronius appeared, the outcome of the Synod of Cyprus. It attempted to show that the new doctrine was inconsistent with [[orthodoxy]]. Sophronius declared that it was nothing more than a bastardised form of monophysitism, which went against the hard-fought achievements at Chalcedon. Suddenly, support for the doctrine began to subside, and soon, former supporters were busy finding flaws and inconsistencies in the proposal.{{sfn|Norwich|1988|p=306}} Soon, Sergius and Heraclius abandoned it as a doctrine.