Some reading (from Christos Yannaras, "The Distinction Between Essence and Energies
and its Importance for Theology"—http://www.geocities.com/trvalentine/orthodox/yannaras.html)

St. Maximus the Confessor uses as an image and an example of such communion the human voice, which being one is participated in by many, and is not swallowed up by the multitude. If by taking this example we can arbitrarily consider human reason as essence, then we can say that the voice represents the energy of the essence of reason, the possibility for us to participate in the essence of reason as the voice reveals and communicates it, to participate, all of us who hear the same voice, in the same essence of the one reason — without this communion becoming our identification with the essence of reason, and without the fragmentation of the essence in as many parts as there are participants in the reason through the voice. Reason, expressed personally, remains unified and indivisible, while at the same time, it is singularly participated by all.

If we should insist on this example of the voice and reason we could clarify one more observation relative to the possibilities of participating in the essence through the energies. The voice certainly represents a revelation of the energy of reason homogenous to the essence of reason and makes possible a direct participation in reason, but a revelation of the energy of reason can also take place from within essences heterogenous to reason: it is possible to formulate into reason other essences such as writing, color, music and marble.

This example indicates that we can speak (together with St. Maximus) about two forms of energy of the same essence or nature: one form which is, as we called it, homogenous to the nature of the one who causes the energy (an ecstatic self-offering of nature in terms of personal otherness); and the other form which reveals itself out of essences heterogenous to the nature of the one who causes the energy, an energy that is effective on things external, according to which the actor acts on objects outside of himself and heterogenous, and obtains a result, which is made up of preexisting matter and is foreign to his own substance.

Accordingly, God's homogenous energy (to use St. Maximus' distinction) is revealed in the Church's experience of divine grace, which is uncreated (heterogenous to creatures and homogenous to God) and through which God is wholly participated in and participated singularly by all, remaining simple and indivisible, offering to the communicant that which He (God) possesses by nature except essential identity and elevating man to the rank of communicant of the divine nature, according to the word of Scripture (II Peter 1:4). On the other hand, the revelation of God's energy in essences heterogenous to God is seen in the character of beings as creatures, created by divine energy. The personal logos of these creatures (a logos of power, wisdom and art), even though it is characteristic to each one of these creatures, in terms of the infinite variety of essences, reveals the singular wholeness of the one divine energy and witnesses to the one, simple and indivisible God.

As for man, we can probably say that the concept of homogenous energy is applicable to the power of love and to the erotic ecstasy of self-giving in terms of which the existential truth about man is made known. This is the mystery of the human nature and of the human person as singular otherness — when man totally belongs to the loved one and is willingly embraced by him entirely. This homogenous energy, however, interprets also the reality of the human body in terms of the singular otherness of each person: the body is par excellence the personal differentiation of the physical energies, the possibility of a meeting and a communion between the created energy of the human essence and the uncreated energy of the Grace of God. As for the revelation of the energy of man through the heterogenous essences of man, it concerns the variety of human creations, in the works of human art, wisdom, and power.

The fundamental fact observed and verified in the distinction of St. Maximus between the homogenous energy of an essence or nature and its heterogenous appearance is that both of these forms of expressing the energy reveal the nature or essence as the singular and unified content of the person. The personal differentiation of the physical energies (the uniqueness and dissimilarity of each human body, as well as the absolute otherness of each erotic event and the differentiation of creative expressions, for example, the music of Bach from the music of Mozart or the painting of Van Gogh from that of Goya) distinguishes the nature without dividing it, it reveals the manner by which nature is — and this manner is its personal singularity and otherness. The energies or distinctions disclose and reveal the catholicity of nature, as content of the person.

 In the distinction of nature and energies Orthodox theology sees the very presupposition for a knowledge of God, as well as of man and of the world. If we reject this distinction and if we accept, with the Roman Catholics, the intellectual leap to the essence itself — an active divine essence — then the only possible relation of the world to God is the rational connection between cause and effect, a connection that leaves unexplained the ontological reality of the world, the formation of matter and its essential character.

 For Orthodox theology matter is not a reality that simply has its cause in God. Matter is the substantiation of the will of God, the result of the personal energy of God; and it remains active as the revelatory reason of divine energy. St. Gregory of Nyssa says that all things were not reshaped from some subsisting matter into phenomena, but the divine will became the matter and the essence of creation. The will of God is an act, and the act of God is His word, for in God the act is word. The word of God which expresses His will is substantiated directly as a substance and a formulation of creation.

Matter, therefore, constitutes the substantiation of the divine will. The logoi of matter, that is to say, its types or forms, reflect the creative logoi of the divine conceptions and volitions. In its own organic content, matter is the result of the union of rational qualities whose convergence and union defines the substance of sensory things. The rational formulation of matter refutes from the start the ontic autonomous character of things; matter is not the what of physical reality, the material which receives shape and form to reveal the essence, but the convergence of the rational qualities, their coordination into the how of a unique harmony which constitutes the type or the form of things. The whole cosmic reality, the innumerable variety of kinds of essences are not the what of objective observation and rational conception; they are not the abstract effect of a rationally conceived active cause, but the how of the personal harmony of rational qualities, a musical harmony constituting a controlled and sublime hymn to the power which controls the universe.

This continuously active personal harmony of the world reveals the direct and energetic presence of God in the world as personal will and energy (and not as essence). It is an endlessly active invitation to a personal relationship with the personal God-Logos through the logoi of things. This active invitation is not essentially identified with the one who invites nor with the energy of the caller; the reason and the will of God is not identified with the created things themselves, just as the will of the artist is not identified with the product of his art, with the result of his personal creative energy. But the work of art is the substantiation and incarnation of the personal reason and will of the artist; it is the active call and possibility of a personal relationship with the creator through the logos of his creations. The work of art is in essence and in energy different from the artist (the art in the artistic is one thing, and quite another is the art in the person who undertakes it, as St. Basil points out).

Post Edited (PotOnWheel) : 5/26/2007 3:35:38 PM (GMT-5)

2. from LINK ( www.holytrinitymission.org/books/english/byzantine_theology_j_meyendorf.htm  )

quote:

---

"Theopaschism" — the acceptance of formulae which affirm that the "Son of God died in the flesh" — illustrates how distinct the concepts of "hypostasis" and "nature" or "essence" really are. The distinction is stressed by one of the main Chalcedonian theologians of the age of Justinian, Leontius of Jerusalem: "The Logos," writes Leontius, "is said to have suffered according to the hypostasis, for within His hypostasis He assumed a passible [human] essence besides His own impassible essence, and what can be asserted of the [human] essence can be asserted of the hypostasis."9 What this implies is that the characteristics of the divine essence — impassibility, immutability, etc. — are not absolutely binding upon the personal, or hypostatic, existence of God. Later we shall see the importance of this fact for the patristic and Byzantine understanding of God. Meanwhile on the level of soteriology, the affirmation that the Son of God indeed "died in the flesh" reflected — better than any other Christological formula — the boundlessness of God’s love for man, the reality of the "appropriation" by the Logos of fallen and mortal humanity — i.e., the very mystery of salvation.

Post Edited (PotOnWheel) : 5/28/2007 1:39:49 PM (GMT-5)

.  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  . 

As Georges Florovsky once remarked, while Catholics and Protestants speak a similar language, there is fundamentally no “common universe of discourse” between East and West. This does not mean that understanding is impossible – but it explains the great difficulties involved in such dialogue, and it helps to account for the comparatively slow progress of ecumenical understanding between East and West. http://faith-theology.blogspot.com/2006/12/michael-pomazansky-orthodox-dogmatic.html

Post Edited (PotOnWheel) : 5/28/2007 2:48:04 PM (GMT-5)

"The Distinction Between Essence and Energies
and its Importance for Theology"—(from Christos Yannaras)

http://www.geocities.com/trvalentine/orthodox/yannaras.html)

 

MIGHT I SUGGEST THAT WE LOOK AT THESE FEW PARAGRAPHS FROM THE ABOVE? !!!

This example indicates that we can speak (together with St. Maximus) about two forms of energy of the same essence or nature: one form which is, as we called it, homogenous to the nature of the one who causes the energy (an ecstatic self-offering of nature in terms of personal otherness); and the other form which reveals itself out of essences heterogenous to the nature of the one who causes the energy, an energy that is effective on things external, according to which the actor acts on objects outside of himself and heterogenous, and obtains a result, which is made up of preexisting matter and is foreign to his own substance.

Accordingly, God's homogenous energy (to use St. Maximus' distinction) is revealed in the Church's experience of divine grace, which is uncreated (heterogenous to creatures and homogenous to God) and through which God is wholly participated in and participated singularly by all, remaining simple and indivisible, offering to the communicant that which He (God) possesses by nature except essential identity and elevating man to the rank of communicant of the divine nature, according to the word of Scripture (II Peter 1:4). On the other hand, the revelation of God's energy in essences heterogenous to God is seen in the character of beings as creatures, created by divine energy. The personal logos of these creatures (a logos of power, wisdom and art), even though it is characteristic to each one of these creatures, in terms of the infinite variety of essences, reveals the singular wholeness of the one divine energy and witnesses to the one, simple and indivisible God.

As for man, we can probably say that the concept of homogenous energy is applicable to the power of love and to the erotic ecstasy of self-giving in terms of which the existential truth about man is made known. This is the mystery of the human nature and of the human person as singular otherness — when man totally belongs to the loved one and is willingly embraced by him entirely. This homogenous energy, however, interprets also the reality of the human body in terms of the singular otherness of each person: the body is par excellence the personal differentiation of the physical energies, the possibility of a meeting and a communion between the created energy of the human essence and the uncreated energy of the Grace of God. As for the revelation of the energy of man through the heterogenous essences of man, it concerns the variety of human creations, in the works of human art, wisdom, and power.

 

WHAT DO YOU SEE THERE?

The third paragraph is worth coming back to. Wow. But let's look at the second.

WHAT DO YOU SEE HERE, BELOW?

In the second paragraph I note (that's the "indirect" verb part) where it says "reveals...witnesses to" and then direct my mind's eye to FLOWERS as an example of this revelation of God.

SEE the NPR "Speaking of Faith radio program! 

Restoring the Senses: Life, Gardening, and an Orthodox Easter ...

Speaking of Faith with Krista Tippett: public radio's conversation about ... I was puzzled by the references to the Armenian Orthodox church — I know of no ... speakingoffaith.publicradio.org/programs/restoringthesenses/reflections.shtml - 34k - Cached - Similar pages

Restoring the Senses: Life, Gardening, and an Orthodox Easter ...

Ms. Tippett: Armenian Orthodox theologian Vigen Guroian. I'm Krista Tippett, and this is Speaking of Faith from American Public Media. ... speakingoffaith.publicradio.org/programs/restoringthesenses/transcript.shtml

Transcript of Audio Program

Billboard:

Krista Tippett, host: I'm Krista Tippett. Today, "Restoring the Senses: Life, Gardening, and an Orthodox Easter." Theologian Vigen Guroian experiences Easter as a call to our senses. This hour, we'll explore his Eastern Orthodox sensibility that is at once more mystical and more earthy than the Christianity dominant in Western culture. And Vigen Guroian does real theology in his garden as richly as in church.

Mr. Vigen Guroian: I'm walking in my garden and all of a sudden, overnight, something has bloomed, maybe the honeysuckle, maybe the rugosa roses, or maybe it's just the cabbage in the vegetable garden. And I don't even see it, but I know it's present. I feel its presence. No, I, I smell its presence. I'm aware of it. For many of us, that's an experience like that of experiencing God in prayer.

Ms. Tippett: This is Speaking of Faith. Stay with us.

http://speakingoffaith.publicradio.org/programs/restoringthesenses/transcript.shtml

 

Post Edited (PotOnWheel) : 7/13/2007 8:25:08 AM (GMT-5)

As for man, we can probably say that the concept of homogenous energy is applicable to the power of love and to the erotic ecstasy of self-giving in terms of which the existential truth about man is made known. This is the mystery of the human nature and of the human person as singular otherness — when man totally belongs to the loved one and is willingly embraced by him entirely. This homogenous energy, however, interprets also the reality of the human body in terms of the singular otherness of each person: the body is par excellence the personal differentiation of the physical energies, the possibility of a meeting and a communion between the created energy of the human essence and the uncreated energy of the Grace of God. As for the revelation of the energy of man through the heterogenous essences of man, it concerns the variety of human creations, in the works of human art, wisdom, and power.

Post Edited (PotOnWheel) : 7/13/2007 8:20:53 AM (GMT-5)

Post Edited (PotOnWheel) : 7/13/2007 8:57:36 AM (GMT-5)

"The problem of the distinction between essence and energies determined definitely and finally the differentiation of the Latin West from the Orthodox East. The West rejected the distinction, desiring to protect the idea of simplicity in the divine essence, since rational thought cannot accept the antinomy of a simultaneous existential identity and otherness, a distinction that does not mean division and fragmentation. For the western mind (expressed either with the directness of Thomistic rationalism or with the subordination of the patristic texts to a priori interpretations, as in the case of Fr. Garrigues) God is defined only in terms of His essence; whatever is not essence does not belong to God; it is a creature of God, the result of divine essence. Consequently, the energies of God are either identified with the essence, which is active (actus purus), or else any external manifestation of theirs is regarded as necessarily heteroessential, i.e. a created result of the divine cause.29"

Post Edited (PotOnWheel) : 7/13/2007 8:59:20 AM (GMT-5)