This article investigates the plausibility of the proof presented at the Sixth Ecumenical Council (680/81) to show that the Logos of Patriarch Menas (536-552) and the two letters of Pope Vigilius (537-555) were forgeries. These texts were among the most important testimonia of the so-called Monotheletes, and prove the assertion of one operation and one will in Christ long before the controversy of the seventh century. Through an analysis of the conciliar acts and other texts it is shown that the argumentation of the council was not only incoherent and self-contradictory but actually scandalous, since the evidence presented by an authentic papyrus roll of the Acts of the Fifth Council, with its clear proof of the authenticity of the Vigilius letters, was ignored. In an adoption and further development of the frequently overlooked treatment of this matter in the 1971 edition of the Acts of the Fifth Ecumenical Council (553) (ACO, ser. I, 4/1) the following is demonstrated: the discovery of the longer first edition of the Acts, containing the Vigilius letters, in the original papyrus rolls of the Acts of the Fifth Council led, from the beginning of the so-called monenergist-monothelete controversy, to the (re‐)introduction of the disputed texts into the shorter second edition contained in codices. It is indisputable that these texts are authentic.

中文翻译：

---

为寻找真相服务的文本批评？六号 大公会议 (680/81) 及其伪造证据

本文调查了在第六届普世大公会议 (680/81) 上提出的证据的合理性，以表明梅纳斯宗主教 (536-552) 和教皇维吉留斯 (537-555) 的两个字母被遗忘。这些文本是所谓的 Monotheletes 最重要的见证之一，并且在七世纪的争论之前很久就证明了在基督里的一种行动和一种意志的断言。通过对大公会议的法案和其他文本的分析表明，理事会的论证不仅不连贯和自相矛盾，而且实际上是可耻的，因为第五届理事会法案的真实纸莎草卷提供的证据，及其Vigilius 信件的真实性的明确证据，但被忽略了。在 1971 年版的第五次大公会议法案 (553) (ACO, ser. I, 4/1) 中对这个问题经常被忽视的处理方式的采纳和进一步发展中，证明了以下内容：使徒行传的第一版，包含 Vigilius 的信件，在第五次会议的使徒行传的原始纸莎草卷中引导，从所谓的 monenergist-monothelete 争论的开始，到有争议的文本（重新）引入包含在法典中的较短的第二版。这些文本的真实性是无可争辩的。在第五次理事会法案的原始纸莎草卷中，从所谓的单能论者-单论者争议的开始，到将有争议的文本（重新）引入包含在法典中的较短的第二版中。这些文本的真实性是无可争辩的。在第五次理事会法案的原始纸莎草卷中，从所谓的单能论者-单论者争议的开始，到将有争议的文本（重新）引入包含在法典中的较短的第二版中。这些文本的真实性是无可争辩的。