Oh, puns. How I love you.
Apparently the energy debate is still going strong, especially between Patrick and Jason at their respective blogs.
I have always thought of different schools of Magic a lot like different languages, each with it's own context, history, slang, drift, etc. And each having a very workable structure within the context of their own language. Cobbling together a few phrases from a book can be effective, but it is much different than being formally educated in the language, or being raised in it. So too with tradition.
It seems that the discussion is trying to focus on "What is really going on here". That is a blind alley. We cannot get there through definition. Seeking to define "Magical Energy" outside of its own context will most likely fail, because in other contexts that term is empty. We can trace the history of the idea, the etymology of the terms, how it flows through culture, merits, flaws, nuance, and all of that will get us one step closer, though never actually there.
Definition is different than experience. I know Jason has experienced what he calls Magical Energy, as have I, which is why I defend the theory, and if I hadn't, I'd have no business defending it.
The only way you will really know a thing is through participation in it. For anyone shooting down or bolstering whatever theory, that is all I ask. Engage in that thing on its own terms, so long as it is safe to do so. Arguing against the existence of Philadelphia is most easily solved by asking someone how to get there, and seeing for yourself if it is there or not.
I am by no means saying that Patrick has not done his own work. No, no, no. Sometimes, though you have to start all over to understand something from the ground up. That empty cup thing they talk about in Zen.