"That is no wonder since the Western paradigms were invented a dozen centuries after the energetic paradigm of Greek-language early Christianity--and lack lineal continuity with Greek-language early Christianity."
Apparently, the author, like many Orthodox I've encountered, denies that anything written in Latin is useful for the faith, but rather is in fact heretical. Moreover, he refuses to recognize that Palamism is a development of the same period 1250-1350 as is Thomism, but instead conflates it with the Christianity of the Apostolic Fathers pre-AD 200, while denying any link between the Fathers and Scholasticism, although Scholasticism was nothing more than an exposition of the totality of the Fathers.
I did find this interesting: "The Orthodox accept that the bread and wine become Christ's ontological Body and Blood at the Epíklesis or Invocation of the All-Holy Spirit". Even if he doesn't want to say "transubstantiation", he just said it anyway with a lot more words.
And its no surprise to see the usual gross distortions of Catholic beliefs:
"Likewise, Aquinas, not distinguishing Essence from Energy, got involved in the silly notion of Christ's members partaking intentionally (conceptually) of the divine Essence--apothéosis (a heresy in Orthodox eyes) rather than théosis."
Contrarywise, St. Thomas Aquinas says "It is impossible for any created intellect to comprehend God" (ST, Pt I, Q 12, Art 7) and "Therefore whosoever sees the essence of God, does not know all things." (ST, Pt I, Q 12, Art 8). Thus, he certainly does not preach apotheosis and does preach theosis:
"By this light the blessed are made 'deiform'--i.e. like to God, according to the saying: 'When He shall appear we shall be like to Him, because we shall see Him as He is' (1 Jn. 2:2)." (ST, Pt I, Q 12, Art 5)"Now the gift of grace surpasses every capability of created nature, since it is nothing short of a partaking of the Divine Nature, which exceeds every other nature. ... For it is ... necessary that God alone should deify, bestowing a partaking of the Divine Nature by a participated likeness ..." (ST, Pt II-I, Q 112, Art 1)
Aquinas never says we become God or join his substance or essence. We see the essence by partaking in grace (energy if you will) and by its manifestation to us as operations.
With the proper intention, it is valid--but, for the Orthodox, still a necessary step short of being afthentikón "real, genuine, authentic."
Same for Catholics. We say Sacraments had apart from the Church lack the reality of the sacrament - the communication of grace. Another invented but nonexistent difference.
The conceptual gulf is unbridgeable as a result of the hiatus of over seven centuries of barbarous Dark Ages and the Latins' being cut off from the East.
Back to the "East has the truth, Latins only have truth by communicating with the East" paradigm.