Orthodox understanding of the Eucharist..

[Tonks]

What is this...some sort of Catholics teach TAW thread?

Bessie's remarks are absolutely correct. Whether it is "in, under, through, with, substantially, unsubstantially, consubstantially, between, atomically" etc are a preoccupation for the West.

I affirmed the exact same thing as Bessie when I entered the Church. Among other things, I found such a pedantic Eucharistic theology was harmful to my spiritual well-being.

 

[Reader Antonius]

What is this...some sort of Catholics teach TAW thread?

I affirmed the exact same thing as Bessie when I entered the Church. Among other things, I found such a pedantic Eucharistic theology was harmful to my spiritual well-being.

Pedantic? Interesting...how so?

I simply used the word substantial cause it's the best word I know how to use to affirm that something "is" something.

Even your profession notes this as Bessie showed. And besides surely there are no Orthodox who would argue with the synods of Constantinople and Jerusalem and their condemnations of the Calvinist "symbolism" and such.

 

[Tonks]

Pedantic? Interesting...how so?

My comment stands as is. I don't wish to discuss or further engage on the topic. I don't care to discuss the Western view or the Eastern view other than what I have already stated. To me it is what it is and it is what I've professed - without having to build up an entire theology of why it is what it is but still tastes like bread (which I also have no intention of discussing further).

Even your profession notes this as Bessie showed. And besides surely there are no Orthodox who would argue with the synods of Constantinople and Jerusalem and their condemnations of the Calvinist "symbolism" and such.

I'm well aware of what the profession states as I've professed the same. Likewise, I could care less what Calvinists think as it has zero impact on my faith. Further discussion on whether it is the same as it was 2,000 years ago is a slippery slope, in my opinion, which leads to errant practices as "Eucharistic Adoration" (which I also do not care to discuss further and will not respond to).

 

[Reader Antonius]

My comment stands as is. I don't wish to discuss or further engage on the topic. I don't care to discuss the Western view or the Eastern view other than what I have already stated. To me it is what it is and it is what I've professed - without having to build up an entire theology of why it is what it is but still tastes like bread (which I also have no intention of discussing further).

Fair enough brother Tonks.

I'm well aware of what the profession states as I've professed the same. Likewise, I could care less what Calvinists think as it has zero impact on my faith. Further discussion on whether it is the same as it was 2,000 years ago is a slippery slope, in my opinion, which leads to errant practices as "Eucharistic Adoration" (which I also do not care to discuss further and will not respond to).

Again as you wish.

I would only like to add that my whole point about the Calvinists was that the Orthodox Church definitively condemned them and the trends of their thought that had taken hold of much of Eastern Orthodoxy even the Patriarch himself.

In doing this, the Orthodox Church convened a synod and explicitly proclaimed her belief about the Eucharistic Presence and condemned "Cyril Lucar." (His Greek name sounds better, LOL. ).

That was essentially my point.

 

[Philothei]

How is this having anything to do with the topic of the thread?

 

[Philothei]

Monica has it occured to you ever to go back to your Orthodox priest and ask him?

 

[MoNiCa4316]

Monica has it occured to you ever to go back to your Orthodox priest and ask him?

the priest is Russian, and I can barely say anything normal in Russian, never mind theology I don't even know how to describe this in English but if I ever meet an English speaking Orthodox priest I'd ask him.

 

[MoNiCa4316]

My understanding is that yes, Christ is physically present in the Eucharist. When I became Orthodox, one of the many things I had to confess at my Chrismation was:

"I believe and confess that: in the Divine Liturgy, under the mystical offering of bread and wine, the faithful partake of the true Body and Blood of our Lord, Jesus Christ, for the remission of sins and eternal life."
Also, at Liturgy we say:
"I believe O Lord, and I confess, that this is truly thine own immaculate body,and that this is truly my most precious blood..."
That seems fairly clear to my little pea brain. No idea, if it's more nuanced than that...


Bessie

Oh also,I wanted to add that at the Presanctified Liturgy everyone prostrates themselves (knees to the ground, head on the ground) when the presantified gifts are brought in, and we are told "The King of Glory enters." I think the Orthodox have a pretty strong understanding of the physical presence of Christ in the Eucharist, even though they don't define it as tightly as the Roman Catholics.

Bessie

thanks It sounds like we believe the same thing except that Catholics add the point about transubstantiation, but both churches teach that it's really physically Christ's Body. lol I don't understand it either but I believe it.

 

[zhilan]

All you have to do if you have any questions about how Orthodox view the Eucharist is attend Divine Liturgy and see the reverence with which the Holy Eucharist is treated. There's no other church that treats communion with such reverence (at least that I have seen).

These days in too many churches, Christ is just haphazardly plopped in people's hands as if they are being given a cookie. The way we treated Christ in the Eucharist shows what we believe.

 

[MoNiCa4316]

All you have to do if you have any questions about how Orthodox view the Eucharist is attend Divine Liturgy and see the reverence with which the Holy Eucharist is treated. There's no other church that treats communion with such reverence (at least that I have seen).

These days in too many churches, Christ is just haphazardly plopped in people's hands as if they are being given a cookie. The way we treated Christ in the Eucharist shows what we believe.

I've been to Divine Liturgy but people can still treat the Eucharist very reverently if they believe that Christ is spiritually present there.. that's why I wanted to clarify, if you all believe He's present spiritually, physically, or in any other way.. or if you don't think in such terms at all..

I think in my church the Eucharist is treated with reverence too, we kneel before Him and in the Tridentine Mass people kneel as they receive Communion. I'm planning to receive the Host in my mouth, not in my hands, in the future.

In the Protestant churches there's little reverence for communion but then again they believe it's a symbol. And in every church I've been to, Catholic, Orthodox, or Protestant, there are always those people who stand in line for Communion as if in a store.

 

[Lukaris]

Fair enough brother Tonks.



Again as you wish.

I would only like to add that my whole point about the Calvinists was that the Orthodox Church definitively condemned them and the trends of their thought that had taken hold of much of Eastern Orthodoxy even the Patriarch himself.

In doing this, the Orthodox Church convened a synod and explicitly proclaimed her belief about the Eucharistic Presence and condemned "Cyril Lucar." (His Greek name sounds better, LOL. ).

That was essentially my point.

The confession attributed to Cyril Lucar (Lukaris) & refuted is not known to actually have been written or approved by him. His overtures to the Protestants were basically for survival of theological education since Orthodox seminaries had almost ceased to exist at this time. The later 17th c old believer crisis in Russia seems to indicate not much was thriving there. Hemmed in by the Moslem Turks & Jesuits the patriarch looked to Protestants like the great King of England Charles I (nobly martyred by Puritan extremists) & high church Anglican for allies. Cyril Lucar also introduced the church to the printing press & was himself martyred (see also http://www.archons.org/patriarchate/history/tourkokratia.asp )

 

[Rowan]

the priest is Russian, and I can barely say anything normal in Russian, never mind theology I don't even know how to describe this in English but if I ever meet an English speaking Orthodox priest I'd ask him.

I can PM you the email addresses of one (or three), and maybe a bishop. I think they might have contacts in Canada for you as well (there's always seems to be someone who knows someone in Orthodoxy in America...). Sound good?

 

[Rdr Iakovos]

With all due respect to Tonks and some of my fellow converts, so-called, to Orthodoxy, the discussion of the Real and, if you will, physical presence of Christ in the Eucharist is a fruitful discussion for a maturing Orthodox Christian.

Here is what has been asked:

1. Is Christ 'more present' at certain times and locales than others?

Yes. ITO precedent, look to times when the Lord was manifestly present in the OT, such as when the 'glory of the Lord filled the Temple (Chronicles) so that the priests could not stand.' In the NT, look to times even after the Ascension, such as when Paul got knocked off his (high) horse.

2. Is Christ physically present in the Eucharist

I have seen this argument couched in physical vs spiritual- a false, dualistic approach.
Yes, He is there physically. We pray before receiving Eucharist " ...I also believe that this is truly your pure Body and truly your precious blood."

It is His resurrected Body that we partake of. How does the consecration effect the physical properties of the bread and wine? We cannot say.

3. When we partake in the Eucharist, is it in a sense reliving the Passion and institution?

We think that way about Holy Week, not as much IRT Eucharistic Sundays. We do believe that the liturgy brings us into the eternal, never ending Liturgy, where ALL the saints feast in His Presence, in a mystery.

I Imagine that this brief discourse may raise as many questions as it has addressed.
peace

 

[Anglian]

Dear Monica,

Our Lord said 'this is my body' and 'this is my blood'. My own Church holds that He meant what He said. Had it been necessary for us to know how this was so, He would have told us. Since He did not, we accept His blessed words and the sacrament we receive,

For the rest, we know we receive Him; arguments over physicality and spirituality are best left to those who feel the need to know more than the Lord told us.

Accept and believe: 'taste and see that the Lord is good.'

peace,

Anglian

 

[jag216]

Hi Monica:

Jesus is the incarnate Word of the Lord. What this means is that in any circumstance where divine wisdom dictates action, Christ is present in essence. When wisdom is heard and obeyed, it 'activates,' and love changes hands to heal the sick, feed the poor, support the oppressed, forgive the sinful - the Spirit of the Lord is present in energy.

It is unhelpful to attempt to deconstruct the Word from the Spirit, because the presence of one naturally contributes to the presence of the other in ways that human beings cannot control - yet can rely upon.

The divine liturgy is unique in that it operates as a concrete icon of the new created world. This is the world that Jesus ascended to prepare - and it is a created reality that will co-exist with the reality we live in only long enough for the passage of the newly resurrected who are judged worthy of entry. At that point the divinely sustained order of the world of today is molted - the second death begins - serving as the footstool for the new creation that is firmly and decisively established against it with Jesus as its head architect.

We approach the liturgy with a great deal of humility, therefore, because our worthiness to enter the Kingdom depends entirely on our willing participation in the fashioning of ourselves in Christ's image by God.

The fact that we approach the sacrifice so humbly and with as much fear, faith and love for God - this indicates that in a very real sense the Eucharist brings to mind the words of Christ - if a person does not eat his flesh and drink his blood, they have no part in him.

Metaphor extended, if a person does not eat at the table of the king - remembering carefully and meticulously all of the rights and responsibilities that is entails, the person has no right to partake in eternal life. You cannot simply observe it - you must ingest Christ into every part of your being - particularly the 'heart' or core. This would not be possible with just bread and wine - you must be immersed. This is also why we do not sprinkle in baptism - we immerse.

So it is not the accidents of the food that are significant to Christ's presence. Rather, it is the fact that you are entering Christ's kingdom, stepping to Christ's antechamber, being given food from Christ's own table and according to the same sacrifice that he offered for us - yet with the bloodless sacrifice. Christ asked the apostle, 'would you drink the cup I am about to drink?' This is the point where Christ recognizes the obligations of the life-giving king when faced with a sinful people who are destined for destruction quid pro quo.

You asked if Christ is present the Eucharist in a special way - I hope you can see that Christ is present in the entire liturgical process in many ways. It's not just about Christ's Body and Blood, it's about Christ's Table, Christ's kingship, Christ's Servants, Christ's Sacrifice, Christ's kingdom - the New Creation, Christ's blessing, etc.

This is why it is likely inappropriate to have communion at your dining room table, or at some place out in the woods - there is an entire sacred element that is preserved by apostolic tradition - the sense of Christ as king. The sense of the church as Christ's palace. This is not entirely unique to eastern orthodox tradition, but despite the lack of general knowledge on the significance of the liturgy, the inertia of the faith has preserved most of these symbols intact, so that Christians can rediscover them again and again throughout history.

Icons depict the saints in regal form - with honor - because they have become heirs by faith in the promises of God. And yet for many of them, taking the body of Christ is their first liturgical act of dedication toward humble service within the constraints of the new creation.

The question is, can you take the sense of the liturgy outside the four walls? Can you mindfully and intentionally see the world as God's kingdom? Can you see the house of the rich and the poor alike as God's house? Can you love selflessly and give life to those in need? If you can already do this all the time - then you are a royal priest and the world is your church. But if you ever need a refresher or if you think you may have forgotten how or lost your way - the Church is there. (You could ask, when is a church not 'the Church' - but that's an entirely different thread.)

Christ not only helps us do this through his example - but we believe that through Christ and the Holy Spirit, God is able to reallocate created resources to repair and do the things we fail to do - either out of fear, doubt or ignorance. It is truly a fascinating process - to see how resourceful God can be when He gets around to fixing something. And sometimes we are the rod - though God breaks the rod too.

 

[JeremiahsBulldog]

Monica,

Yes, we Orthodox believe that Christ is truly present, bodily and spiritually, in the Eucharist; and at the same time, He is present everywhere else spiritually.

When we partake of the Eucharist, we partake of His body and blood.

We avoid words like "transubstantiation" "consubstantiation" or anything with the word "substance"-- which means essence-- only because we wish to preserve a clear distinction between:

God's Essence (what He 'is' in His infinite transcendence), which is forever unknowable and incommunicable by created things, and

His Energies, i.e., His interactions with us and with the rest of creation. All biblical words for God's actions towards us-- like "Grace", "Peace", "Justification", "Salvation", etc. refer to His Energies. Also, all divine visions in the bible were manifestations of His Energies.

No created thing ever did or ever will come into direct contact with God's Essence-- except the human nature of Christ. In Christ, both God's Energies-- and God's Essence-- are fully present.

You can see how this Essence vs. Energies thing only complicates discussions of the Eucharist. That's why we avoid all nitpicking and simply say that we believe in the real presence of Christ's body and blood in the Eucharist.

 

[MoNiCa4316]

I can PM you the email addresses of one (or three), and maybe a bishop. I think they might have contacts in Canada for you as well (there's always seems to be someone who knows someone in Orthodoxy in America...). Sound good?

thanks Rowan what I asked was mainly a curiosity and I've gotten some replies already, but - in the future I might have more questions to ask.. that it would be good to have a priest answer, to get the 'official' Orthodox position.. so if you want to, you can send me one of the addresses I don't know if would be kind of awkward for the priest to get an email from someone who's never been to his parish?

With all due respect to Tonks and some of my fellow converts, so-called, to Orthodoxy, the discussion of the Real and, if you will, physical presence of Christ in the Eucharist is a fruitful discussion for a maturing Orthodox Christian.

Here is what has been asked:

1. Is Christ 'more present' at certain times and locales than others?

Yes. ITO precedent, look to times when the Lord was manifestly present in the OT, such as when the 'glory of the Lord filled the Temple (Chronicles) so that the priests could not stand.' In the NT, look to times even after the Ascension, such as when Paul got knocked off his (high) horse.

2. Is Christ physically present in the Eucharist

I have seen this argument couched in physical vs spiritual- a false, dualistic approach.
Yes, He is there physically. We pray before receiving Eucharist " ...I also believe that this is truly your pure Body and truly your precious blood."

It is His resurrected Body that we partake of. How does the consecration effect the physical properties of the bread and wine? We cannot say.

3. When we partake in the Eucharist, is it in a sense reliving the Passion and institution?

We think that way about Holy Week, not as much IRT Eucharistic Sundays. We do believe that the liturgy brings us into the eternal, never ending Liturgy, where ALL the saints feast in His Presence, in a mystery.

I Imagine that this brief discourse may raise as many questions as it has addressed.
peace

thanks, that helps! well just one question.. a very 'Catholic' question, I guess, lol, but - you mentioned that it's not known how the bread and wine are affected by the consecration. Do you believe that the bread and wine are still THERE, afterwards, or can it be said that like in Catholic theology, they're not present except their appearances? Or is this getting too 'detailed' for the Orthodox understanding of the Eucharist? Otherwise I agree with everything, from the way you see the liturgy to Christ being physically present in the Eucharist..

Dear Monica,

Our Lord said 'this is my body' and 'this is my blood'. My own Church holds that He meant what He said. Had it been necessary for us to know how this was so, He would have told us. Since He did not, we accept His blessed words and the sacrament we receive,

For the rest, we know we receive Him; arguments over physicality and spirituality are best left to those who feel the need to know more than the Lord told us.

Accept and believe: 'taste and see that the Lord is good.'

peace,

Anglian

haha oki thanks Anglian I agree that childlike simple faith is really the best. I don't understand the Eucharist well myself, - and I don't understand how Christ could humble Himself so, but - God has said it is true.. however I wondered if the Orthodox church says anything about this question, because it seems that Protestants say one thing and Catholics say another.

 

[HandmaidenOfGod]

Monica,

If you want to emaill an Orthodox priest, there's no harm in doing so. Just say that you had a couple questions about the Orthodox understanding of the Eucharist. I'm sure they'll be happy to explain.

One word of caution though; as a person who has to email clergy on a regular basis for a number of things, DO NOT expect a quick response! lol

In fact, if you don't hear from them in a couple days, don't take it as an insult, just pick up the phone and call them.

In my experience some priests, especially the older ones have a tendency to neglect their email.

In XC,

Maureen

 

[MoNiCa4316]

Hi Monica:

Jesus is the incarnate Word of the Lord. What this means is that in any circumstance where divine wisdom dictates action, Christ is present in essence. When wisdom is heard and obeyed, it 'activates,' and love changes hands to heal the sick, feed the poor, support the oppressed, forgive the sinful - the Spirit of the Lord is present in energy.

It is unhelpful to attempt to deconstruct the Word from the Spirit, because the presence of one naturally contributes to the presence of the other in ways that human beings cannot control - yet can rely upon.

The divine liturgy is unique in that it operates as a concrete icon of the new created world. This is the world that Jesus ascended to prepare - and it is a created reality that will co-exist with the reality we live in only long enough for the passage of the newly resurrected who are judged worthy of entry. At that point the divinely sustained order of the world of today is molted - the second death begins - serving as the footstool for the new creation that is firmly and decisively established against it with Jesus as its head architect.

We approach the liturgy with a great deal of humility, therefore, because our worthiness to enter the Kingdom depends entirely on our willing participation in the fashioning of ourselves in Christ's image by God.

The fact that we approach the sacrifice so humbly and with as much fear, faith and love for God - this indicates that in a very real sense the Eucharist brings to mind the words of Christ - if a person does not eat his flesh and drink his blood, they have no part in him.

Metaphor extended, if a person does not eat at the table of the king - remembering carefully and meticulously all of the rights and responsibilities that is entails, the person has no right to partake in eternal life. You cannot simply observe it - you must ingest Christ into every part of your being - particularly the 'heart' or core. This would not be possible with just bread and wine - you must be immersed. This is also why we do not sprinkle in baptism - we immerse.

So it is not the accidents of the food that are significant to Christ's presence. Rather, it is the fact that you are entering Christ's kingdom, stepping to Christ's antechamber, being given food from Christ's own table and according to the same sacrifice that he offered for us - yet with the bloodless sacrifice. Christ asked the apostle, 'would you drink the cup I am about to drink?' This is the point where Christ recognizes the obligations of the life-giving king when faced with a sinful people who are destined for destruction quid pro quo.

You asked if Christ is present the Eucharist in a special way - I hope you can see that Christ is present in the entire liturgical process in many ways. It's not just about Christ's Body and Blood, it's about Christ's Table, Christ's kingship, Christ's Servants, Christ's Sacrifice, Christ's kingdom - the New Creation, Christ's blessing, etc.

This is why it is likely inappropriate to have communion at your dining room table, or at some place out in the woods - there is an entire sacred element that is preserved by apostolic tradition - the sense of Christ as king. The sense of the church as Christ's palace. This is not entirely unique to eastern orthodox tradition, but despite the lack of general knowledge on the significance of the liturgy, the inertia of the faith has preserved most of these symbols intact, so that Christians can rediscover them again and again throughout history.

Icons depict the saints in regal form - with honor - because they have become heirs by faith in the promises of God. And yet for many of them, taking the body of Christ is their first liturgical act of dedication toward humble service within the constraints of the new creation.

The question is, can you take the sense of the liturgy outside the four walls? Can you mindfully and intentionally see the world as God's kingdom? Can you see the house of the rich and the poor alike as God's house? Can you love selflessly and give life to those in need? If you can already do this all the time - then you are a royal priest and the world is your church. But if you ever need a refresher or if you think you may have forgotten how or lost your way - the Church is there. (You could ask, when is a church not 'the Church' - but that's an entirely different thread.)

Christ not only helps us do this through his example - but we believe that through Christ and the Holy Spirit, God is able to reallocate created resources to repair and do the things we fail to do - either out of fear, doubt or ignorance. It is truly a fascinating process - to see how resourceful God can be when He gets around to fixing something. And sometimes we are the rod - though God breaks the rod too.

thanks, that's very deep, wow it helped me understand some things..
you mentioned 'sacrifice' - so the Orthodox too see the Eucharist as a sacrifice (the original one)? like "the sacrifice of the Mass"?
I think I kind of see what you are saying, that the liturgy in the church is like a visible representation of the new kingdom that God is making, and has its own unique spiritual reality? (or did I phrase that incorrectly).

the way I see it, at DL or Mass, we worship together with the Angels and Saints, and the Blessed Virgin Mary is there too. So there is a spiritual reality that we can not see. If one is at a highly decorated beautiful church (such as a cathedral, for example) the visible reality is made to reflect the spiritual.. but there are also little mission churches out there with only a few icons, or churches in new buildings, - where you have to look beyond it all to the invisible spiritual.. (and maybe with practice, we would be able to do this too outside the church) sometimes by grace a person can get little hints of what is "really" happening at liturgy. And what is happening is that we are essentially at Calvary, before the timeless sacrifice, and when we receive Christ's Body and Blood we do enter into something greater.. into the 'new' life, a new way of 'being'.. and the liturgy is like the 'bridge' between heaven and earth, we're on earth but united in worship with those in Heaven, because we're all worshipping the "Lamb that was slain" physically present before us.

So in that way I agree with you that it's more than just about Christ's present in the Eucharist itself. It's an entire spiritual event. The liturgy reminds us of that, either in the icons that remind people of Saints, or at Mass how we sing "Holy holy holy" together with Heaven..

yet I think since when we're before the Eucharist we're before the Lord Himself, it must be sufficient that we simply believe this and love Him when we receive Communion.. if we come to Him like children, with pure hearts, we would not receive any fewer graces than someone who really understands what happens in the liturgy. It is love the Lord is looking for, not intellectual or spiritual understanding. For this reason I find it helpful to focus entirely on His presence in the Eucharist after the consecration.. before then, we prepare for His coming by prayer, worship, reading Scripture, repentance.. and afterwards, - He is there - physically present before us - and all the angels that no doubt are there at liturgy too, are worshipping Him as well..

So while I agree with you that "Christ is present in the entire liturgical process in many ways. It's not just about Christ's Body and Blood, it's about Christ's Table, Christ's kingship, Christ's Servants, Christ's Sacrifice, Christ's kingdom - the New Creation, Christ's blessing, etc."
I also think that Christ is present in the Eucharist in the most special and exclusive way, because it IS Him. Christ's Table, Kingship, Servants, etc - all very important, yet they are not Himself.. the Blessed Sacrament is. That's why I asked the question in the OP, because some people (for example, my Protestant friend) have been saying that Christ is not present there any more than in other places.. and I think differently, I think He's present in the Eucharist just like in Heaven (His Body is in heaven), and just like 2000 years ago. So when we receive Communion, many things happen, but the most important and special thing is that we become united with Christ.. Him in us, and us in Him. And then our job is to just love Him and allow Him to change us.

my two cents I don't disagree with anything you said, maybe we just have different ways of approaching this..

 

[MoNiCa4316]

Monica,

Yes, we Orthodox believe that Christ is truly present, bodily and spiritually, in the Eucharist; and at the same time, He is present everywhere else spiritually.

I agree!

When we partake of the Eucharist, we partake of His body and blood.

We avoid words like "transubstantiation" "consubstantiation" or anything with the word "substance"-- which means essence-- only because we wish to preserve a clear distinction between:

God's Essence (what He 'is' in His infinite transcendence), which is forever unknowable and incommunicable by created things, and

His Energies, i.e., His interactions with us and with the rest of creation. All biblical words for God's actions towards us-- like "Grace", "Peace", "Justification", "Salvation", etc. refer to His Energies. Also, all divine visions in the bible were manifestations of His Energies.

No created thing ever did or ever will come into direct contact with God's Essence-- except the human nature of Christ. In Christ, both God's Energies-- and God's Essence-- are fully present.

You can see how this Essence vs. Energies thing only complicates discussions of the Eucharist. That's why we avoid all nitpicking and simply say that we believe in the real presence of Christ's body and blood in the Eucharist.

I see...

wow that's way above my head though, lol. I don't really understand all this 'essence' 'energies' thing.. (either the Catholic OR the Orthodox argument). I agree though that we can't fully know God and that we only know what He communicates to us.
Although Catholics believe in transubstantiation, we do agree that it is a mystery, meaning that we don't fully understand how it happens or even how something could be one thing (essence) but look like another (accidents).

I guess what I'm wondering now is, ..according to Orthodoxy..Is Christ present in the Eucharist in His 'essence', or in His 'energies'. And that's probably the very question you were trying to avoid haha.. but is there an answer?