Holy Scripture in the monothelite controversy. The Standpoint of Maximus the Confessor


The position of Maximus the Confessor concerning the biblical argumentation in the dispute with Monotheletism consists in applying predominantly the literal approach to the interpretation of the New Testament. Since it was a Christological question, the New Testament played a substantial role. However, there are several instances of where Maximus applies allegorical and typological mode of inter­preting the particular passages. Preferring the literal mode of interpretation may signify that Maximus sticking to the letter of the text avoided manipulating the inspired text with many variations in interpretation. Biblical argument is not suf­ficient on its own to be persuasive in theological discussion, therefore it requires additional support and explanation. That is why Scripture is not thought of as the sole authority for Christian faith. It is interpreted by Maximus with taking into account not only the teaching of the Fathers and the Councils but also the philosophical heritage. If the Fathers and Councils can not answer to the current theological question, the interpretation of Scripture should be collated with the teaching of the Holy See.


Holy Scripture; monotheletism; Maximus Confessor; scriptural argumentation

Acta in primo exsilio seu dialogus Maximi cum Theodosio episcopo Caesareae in Bithynia, PG 90, 136D-172B.
Anastasius Apocrisiarius, Relatio motionis inter Maximum et principles, PG 90, 109C-129D.
Aristoteles, De anima, ed. G. Biehl, Lipsiae 1896.
Concilium Lateranense a. 649 celebratum, ed. R. Riedinger, ACO II/1, Berlin 1984.
Expositio orthodoxae fidei (Ecthesis), ed. R. Riedinger, w: Concilium Lateranense a. 649 celebratum, ACO II/1, Berlin 1984, 156, 27 - 162, 13 (secretarius III).
Maximus Confessor, Ambiguorum liber, PG 91, 1032-1417.
Maximus Confessor, Capita de caritate, PG 90, 960-1080.
Maximus Confessor, Capita theologica et oecumenica, PG 90, 1084-1176.
Maximus Confessor, Disputatio cum Pyrrho, PG 91, 288-353.
Maximus Confessor, Epistula ad Anastasium, PG 90, 132A - 133A.
Maximus Confessor, Epistula ad Thalassium, PG 90, 244-261.
Maximus Confessor, Epistulae XLV, PG 91, 364-649.
Maximus Confessor, Mystagogia, PG 91, 657-717.
Maximus Confessor, Opuscula theologica et polemica, PG 91, 9-285.
Maximus Confessor, Orationis dominicae expositio, PG 90, 872-909.
Maximus Confessor, Quaestiones ad Thalassium, PG 90, 244-785.
Maximus Confessor, Quaestiones et dubia, PG 90, 785-856.
Paulus II Constantinopolitanus, Epistula ad Theodorum papam, Mansi X 1020-1025.
Pyrrhus Constantinopolitanus, Epistula ad Iohannem IV Papam (fragmenta), ed. R. Riedinger, ACO II/1, Berlin 1984, 338, 16-22.
Satisfactio facta inter Cyrum et eos qui erant ex parte Theodosianorum, Mansi XI 564C-568B.
Sergius Constantinopolitanus, Epistula ad Honorium Papam, Mansi XI 529A - 537B.
Typus (Constantis imperatoris), ed. R. Riedinger, w: Concilium Lateranense a. 649 celebratum, ACO II/1, Berlin 1984, 206, 31 - 210, 15 (secretarius IV).
Vita ac certamen Sancti Maximi Confessoris, PG 90, 68A - 109B.
Bathrellos D., The Byzantine Christ. Person, Nature, and Will in the Christology of Saint Maximus the Confessor, Oxford 2004.
BertholdG.C., Levels of Scriptural Meaning in Maximus the Confessor, StPatr 27 (1993) 129-144.
Dagron G., Kościół bizantyński i chrześcijaństwo bizantyńskie między najazdami a ikonoklazmem (VII wiek – początek VIII wieku), in: Historia chrześcijaństwa. Religia – kultura – polityka, vol. 4: Biskupi, mnisi i cesarze 610-1054, ed. J.M. Mayer – Ch.I.L. Pietri – A. Vauchez – M. Venard, Polish edition J. Kłoczowski, Warszawa 1999, 17-85.
Doucet M., La volonté humaine du Christ, spécialement en son agonie. Maxime Le Confesseur, Interprète de l’Écriture, „Science et Esprit” 37 (1985) fasc. 2, 123-159.
Greig J., The Dilemma of Deliberation: On the faculty and Mode of Willing in Aristotle and Maximus the Confessor, https://www.scribd.com/document/127364720/On-the-Faculty-and-Mode-of-Willing-in-Aristotle-and-Maximus-the-Confessor [29.07.2016].
Hovorun C., Will, Action and Freedom: Christological Controversies in the Seventh Century, Leiden 2008.
Kashchuk O., Człowiek jako dynamiczna jednostka duchowo-cielesna w nauczaniu św. Maksyma Wyznawcy, "Vox Patrum" 64 (2015) 205-230.
Kashchuk O., Idea pentarchii jako rękojmia jedności Kościoła w dobie ikonoklazmu. Stanowisko Teodora Studyty, "Vox Patrum" 58 (2012) 201-220.
Kattan A.E., The Christological Dimension of Maximus Confessor’s Biblical Hermeneutics, StPatr 42 (2006) 169-174.
Léthel F.-M., La prière de Jésus à Gethsémani dans le controverse monothélite, in: Actes du Symposium sur Maxime le Confesseur, Fribourg, 2-5 Septembre 1980, éd. F. Heinzer – Ch. Schönborn, Paradosis 27, Fribourg 1982, 207-214.
Meyendorff J., Byzantine Theology. Historical Trends and Doctrinal Themes, New York 1974.
Pelikan J., „Council or Father or Scripture”: The Concept of Authority in the Theology of Maximus Confessor, in: The Heritage of the Early Church. The essays in honor of G.V. Florovsky, ed. D. Neiman – M. Schatken, OCA 195, Roma 1973, 277-288.
Pelikan J., The Christian Tradition: A History of the Development of Doctrine, vol. 2: The Spirit of Eastern Christendom (600-1700), Chicago – London 1974.
Stratos A.N., Byzantium in the Seventh Century, vol. 1: 602-634, transl. M. Ogilvie- Grant, Amsterdam 1968.
Thunberg L., Microcosm and Mediator. The Theological Anthropology of Maximus the Confessor, Lund 1965.

Published : 2018-12-16

Kashchuk, O. (2018). Holy Scripture in the monothelite controversy. The Standpoint of Maximus the Confessor. Vox Patrum, 68, 465-477. https://doi.org/10.31743/vp.3372

Oleksandr Kashchuk 
Lviv Ukrainian Catholic University  Ukraine

Most read articles by the same author(s)