ABSTRACT
Michael C. Rea isolates two possible points of disagreement with the Position Statement, the first of which centres on divine transcendence, and in particular on the nature and function of apophatic discourse in theology. He takes the most contentious aspect of the views on divine transcendence to consist in the claim that "negative statements about God are 'more ultimate or truer' than positive statements about God". The distinction between ousia and energeia is certainly not conceived as an ontological distinction – that is to say, as a partition or division within the very nature or being of God. John Bishop points to a well-known conundrum in the distinction often made in Orthodox theology between the essence of God and the energies of God. Kevin Hart opts for the method of 'perfect being theology', but there are significant limitations and problems with such a method.
