Title: Divine Energies and Divine Action: Exploring the Essence-Energies Distinction, David Bradshaw
Published by: IOTA Publications, St. Paul, Minnesota (2023)
Language: English
ISBN: 978-1-7352951-5-2 (paperback); 978-7352951-6-9 (e-book)
Pages: xvii, 226
Divine Energies and Divine Action is a collection of eight essays on the nature and significance of the essence-energies distinction by David Bradshaw, a (if not the) leading expert on topic. The volume complements his earlier monograph Aristotle East and West: Metaphysics and the Division of Christendom (Cambridge, 2004). In this earlier work, Bradshaw elucidated the philosophical development of the distinction between ousia (οὐσία) and energeiai (ἐνέργεια) and highlighted the role that this distinction played in the emergence of key theological differences that emerged in the second millennium in the Christian West, in the wake of the ascent of Scholastic-Aristotelianism. In the present volume, he explains the conception of the divine energies, demonstrates how the concept elucidates the nature of divine action in both the Old and the New Testaments, and presents a defense of his analysis in response to the work of his critics. He concludes by offering an overview of more recent scholarly discussions and suggesting how scholars might continue to discuss the distinction profitably in the future.
Having provided a broad overview of the text, I will offer a brief summary of the details of the analysis that Bradshaw presents in each essay. I will then conclude with some evaluative comments on the significance of the volume.
The first chapter provides an introduction to the concept of the divine energies, which essentially summarizes the main themes Aristotle East and West (xii). The essay begins with an overview of the way that the concept of “energies” (energeiai) is presented both in ancient philosophy and in the writings of the New Testament. It offers a summary analysis of the ways that concept was employed by the Cappadocian Fathers—e.g., St Basil the Great, St Gregory of Nyssa, St Gregory Nazianzus—and other patristic writers—e.g., St Dionysius the Areopagite, St Maximos the Confessor. With these fundamental historical points in mind, it then offers an analysis of the ways that Orthodox Christian theologians, like St Gregory Palamas, continued this patristic use of the concept, and contrasts their work with the ways that Roman Catholic theology evolved, especially in the works of Augustine and Aquinas.
The second chapter extends these conceptual insights by elucidating the way that the apostles presented the divine energies in their New Testament writings. Bradshaw begins by analyzing occurrences of the noun form of the concept: i.e., energia. He then presents a corresponding analysis of the verb form: i.e., energein, in its active as well as its middle and passive forms. He continues by examining the interpretations of these passage in the works of various patristic authors—e.g., St Justin Martyr, St Clement of Alexandria, St John Chrysostom, St Maximos the Confessor, St Dionysius the Areopagite, and St Maximos the Confessor. He then proposes reasons why the concept of divine energies, though present in the New Testament, was overlooked by Roman Catholic and Protestant commentators in the period leading up to and through of the Reformation.
The third chapter provides a similar kind of detailed scriptural examination of the presentations of the divine glory. Bradshaw’s analysis focuses principally, though not exclusive, on the manifestation the divine glory in the Torah. As in the previous essays, Bradshaw argues that the Cappadocian Fathers provide clearer and more accurate expositions of the divine glory than Augustine. Likewise, and consequently, he contends that Orthodox Christian theologians, who follow the Cappadocians and similarly minded Eastern Fathers, provide and interpretation of the divine glory that is more philosophically cogent and scripturally sound than Western Christian theologians who adopt Augustine’s reading.
The fourth essay presents a nuanced analysis of the metaphysics of the essence-energies distinction and uses this analysis to elucidate St Gregory Palamas’s use of the concept. The chapter begins by elucidating the conception of epinoia and explains its use in two important theological debates. The first is its use by patristic authors in their attempts to articulate the kind of distinctions that obtain among the persons of the Trinity. The second is its use in debates concerning the filioque. It then turns from East to West and articulates the three types of distinctions that became prominent in the High Scholastic and Second Scholastic periods: namely, (1) a real distinction, which obtains either between two entities or between an entity and its modes, and is independent of the mind, (2) a rational distinction that obtains between two things, but “only in virtue of being thought,” and (3) a notional distinction, which “obtains only in virtue of being thought … and more specifically in virtue of different names conventionally applied to a singly reality, e.g., Tully vs. Cicero” (108-110). Bradshaw then notes Scotus’s further nuanced development of what he calls a formal distinction, which “obtains between two things that cannot exist separately” but can be defined or understood without reference to one another (110). In essence, the scholarly debate that motivates Bradshaw’s analysis is this: How does Palamas conceive of the essence-energies distinction? Is it a real distinction? A rational distinction? A notional distinction? Bradshaw concludes that “[t]he best general description of the essence-energies distinction remains that which is implied by the meaning of the word energeiai itself: it is the distinction between an agent and that agent’s activity” (117). Thus, he claims that the distinction is sui generis (xiii), in the sense that “we ought to understand it on its own terms, in light of the sources and concerns that shaped Palamas’s thought” rather than seeking to fit the concept into scholastic categories that are foreign to Palamas’s understanding (117).
The fifth chapter offers a similarly nuanced discussion of the metaphysics of the essence-energies distinction. Its principal focus is the relationship between the divine energies and divine processions. Bradshaw’s analysis in this chapter is of particular interest for two reasons. The first is that the relationship between divine energies and divine processions is critical for understanding differences between the Christian conception of God and the Platonist conception of The One. The second is that in order to facilitate the analysis of these central themes, Bradshaw also analyzes the relationship between divine energies and related metaphysical concepts, like divine attributes, powers, and characteristics. Like the previous chapters, this one is rich in the way that it engages both biblical and patristic sources. Regarding the latter, this chapter is a nice complement to the previous essays insofar as it offers even more engagement with the works St Gregory of Nyssa, St Maximos the Confessor, and Dionysius the Areopagite as a way of elucidating the work of St Gregory Palamas.
The sixth essay, “Perceiving Nature as It Is,” draws “on the concept of the divine energies to understand the way that perception”— especially human perception of nature—“can be transformed through moral and spiritual practices” (xiii, 133-4). Bradshaw begins by discussing the possibility that one’s moral condition affects one’s ability to perceive nature accurately—or more specifically, “veridically.” He continues, drawing on the Psalms, to highlight the fact that Jew and Christians have traditionally held a view of this sort: namely, that one’s spiritual condition affects one’s ability to see nature veridically. His analysis then appeals to patristic sources to help explain this traditional Jewish and Christian view in metaphysical terms, drawing upon their conception of the divine logoi that are present in creation. The analysis continues by elucidating the relationship of the divine logoi and the divine energies. It concludes with an illuminating summary of the ways that each concept can help to explain aspects of human perception. The concept of the divine logoi helps to explain a way in which people can “read,” or perceive, divine discourse insofar as it is written into the natures of created beings. The concept of the divine energies helps to explain both the “the vision of the uncreated light” that was experienced by the apostles on Mt. Tabor, as described by Palamas, and “the synergistic participation” of human beings in God’s activity in the created world, as described by St. Paul in his epistles (149).
The seventh chapter, “In Defense of the Essence-Energies Distinction,” presents the replies that Bradshaw offered to the critics of Aristotle East and West within the first decade after its publication. Bradshaw begins with a brief note regarding some minor points of (essentially friendly) disagreement by Gregorios Martzelos and Metropolitan Vasilios. He continues by offering replies to more substantive disagreements by Constantinos Athanasapoulos, concerning Bradshaw’s reading of Palamas, and Fr Nikolaus Loudovikos and Nick Trakakis, concerning his analysis of the divine energies as it relates to understanding the uncreated light. He then offers his strongest rebuttals of John Milbank’s rejection of the essence-energies distinction and Fr Antoine Lévy’s critique of Bradshaw’s scholarly methodology.
In the Afterword, “Of Essence, Energies, and Computer Programs,” Bradshaw offers reflections on ways in which the essence-energies distinction has been developed in more recent works. He begins by discussing three major monographs that were published after Aristotle East and West and most of the essays in this volume: Jean-Claude Larchet’s La Théologie des Énergies Divine: Des Origines à Saint Jean Damascène (Les Éditions du Cerf, 2010), Torstein Tollefsen’s Activity and Participation in Late Antique and Early Christian Thought (Oxford, 2012), and Tikhon Pino’s Essence and Energies: Being and Naming God in St. Gregory Palamas (Routledge, 2023). He acknowledges compelling aspects of their work and acknowledges the extent to which his previous formulations of the essence-energies distinction were “inadequate” (181). He then offers an historical sketch of what he takes to be the fundamental challenge: namely, the “multi-faceted meaning of ousia” (181ff). In light of this historical survey, he offers a preliminary response to the concerns raised by Pino especially regarding his presentation of the divine essence. Bradshaw proposes that the divine essence “functions conceptually like a computer program” (191). He then attempts to show how this analogy can be used to understand the sense in which the divine essence and the divine energies are identical, aspects of divine causation, and how the energies are both truly God and yet distinct from the divine essence. He goes on to show how the analogy can be used to explain the apophaticism of the Greek Fathers, the nature of natural energies, and the difference between the divine natural energies (or “things around God”) and God’s manifest energies. He concludes by highlighting some ways in which the essence-energies distinction has been discussed in various other articles and essays, which highlight profitable lines of inquiry that scholars might use to develop further insightful and important work on the essence-energies distinction.
These chapter summaries only begin to highlight the richness of the volume. Nonetheless, I hope that they suffice to give readers of this review an understanding of the essence and importance of Bradshaw’s arguments. Having provided an overview of the text, an outline of some of its contents, and a concise survey of some of its key details, let me close by offering some evaluative comments.
In my estimation, Divine Energies and Divine Action has three principal strengths. First, it offers a rich and sustained analysis of a fundamentally important and influential metaphysical and theological concept by a (if not the) leading scholar in the field. Second, Bradshaw’s arguments present an excellent synthesis of philosophical, theological, and biblical scholarship, which manifest both the acumen of a scholar and the spiritual insight of a person for whom this scholarly work is not merely academic. Third, the arrangement of the essays in a single volume provides an instructive narrative that will help its readers to understand the development of the concept of the divine energies, and related themes, both through the Old and New Testaments, and through the early patristic and medieval periods.
I anticipate the scholars will have two principal lines of objection to Bradshaw’s analysis. First, given that Bradshaw presents his computer analogy rather briefly at the end of this volume, I expect that scholars will press him to explain it in greater detail. (N.b., as I understand it, he is currently working on doing so.) Second, I suspect that some scholars will (continue to) take issue with the way that Bradshaw presents the differences between Orthodox Christian theology, on the one hand, and the theologies of Roman Catholicism and Protestantism, on the other. Among these, I suspect that those who specialize in the works of Aquinas or Scotus might present the most compelling critiques. By my lights, this would be a good, and possibly an excellent, development. For every contested claim, either Bradshaw’s analysis is correct, or it is not. In either case, Orthodox Christians, Roman Catholics, Protestants, and others should welcome the opportunity to seek the truth together in love, and to reform their views—and as necessary their religious practices—accordingly.
For each of these reasons, Divine Energies and Divine Action is a valuable resource for those who work in philosophy, theology, or biblical studies. To the extent that scholars take the time to wrestle with Bradshaw’s arguments, the volume is likely to facilitate the kind of rich and profitable cross-cultural, inter-disciplinary discussions that IOTA is aptly helping to promote.
Rico Vitz
