Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!wuarchive!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: smith_c@ncsatl.uucp (Spawn of a Jewish Carpenter) Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: Capital Sins and Capital Virtues Message-ID: Date: 30 Oct 89 03:21:52 GMT Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu Organization: National Computer Systems, Atlanta, GA Lines: 140 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu Incidentally, Seven Capital Sins Seven Capital Virtues __________________ _____________________ 1. Pride 1. Humility 2. Avarice 2. Liberality 3. Lust 3. Chastity 4. Anger 4. Meekness 5. Gluttony 5. Temperance 6. Envy 6. Brotherly love 7. Sloth 7. Diligence I think these are called capital because they are the leading tendencies towards sin; I don't think it has anything to do with how grave they are, you know, all that mortal and venial stuff. I don't know what the Catholic Church has to say about Jesus God losing His Holy Temper when He drove out the money-changers. Righteous anger, I guess. I suppose that means if you're "righteously" angry with your brother, that's okay, as long as you forgive him, either after he repents, or before he repents, if you're really charitable. As for gluttony, hmmm, remember the one about Jesus saying, "John the Baptist came neither eating nor drinking and they called him possessed. The Son of Man came eating and drinking and they called him a drunkard and a glutton. Yet wisdom is justified by all of her children." Did I get it right? Heh. I think the Baptists take Temperance a bit too far. I remember telling someone recently about the first time I received Communion in the Baptist Church with my mother-in-law. They passed out the Blood of Christ in these little plastic cups and the Body of Christ were these little crackers on a tray they passed around the pews. When the priest gave the go-ahead (er, Reverend, I guess), everybody ate the Body of Christ at the same time. Then, he gave the go-ahead to drink from our little plastic cups. I can't tell you how *shocked* I was when I discovered it was grape juice....I felt like I knew how the wine stewards at Cana felt when they tasted the water and, behold, it had turned into wine. I don't mean to offend anyone, I was just really *shocked*, I kid you not....However, I understand and appreciate the Baptist attitude towards using the "unfermented fruit of the vine." I mean, I don't want to get into a temperance debate, it was just a very interesting experience. When the priest was consecrating the Bread, I kept waiting for the ritual words, but he didn't use any in the prayer that I recognized, but then I'm not a Baptist, so I'm not familiar with whether or not they use a standard ritual. Perhaps some Protestants out there can help me out. Someone told me recently that Protestants do not believe that Jesus is really present in the Bread and Wine. Now, I thought the Protestants simply didn't agree with transubstantiation, believing that Jesus is really present in the Bread and Wine, as well as being really present in the Word of God, too, among other things. Perhaps some Protestants on this forum can help me out here. -- Standard Disclaimer: These are my soul opinions, heartfelt and passionately expressed. They do not reflect the opinions of National Computer Systems, whatever *they* might be.... Yours in Christ, SPAWN OF A JEWISH CARPENTER [I understand your concern about grape juice. It doesn't necessarily imply that we think there is anything intrinsically wrong with wine. Many denominations use grape juice even when they permit members to drink alcohol. Here's the argument: Unfortunately there is a substantial portion of our population that can't use alcoholic beverages safely. My guess is that the quantity involved in communion is not enough to cause objective problems for anyone. However there are those who are able to function only because of a strong commitment not to drink anything alcoholic. We should not take a chance of weakening that commitment. It's worth the esthetic loss in order to avoid causing a brother or sister to stumble. Even those groups that normally use wine may make grape juice available for those who prefer it. As for the Real Presence, there several different views. Generally the Reformed, Lutheran, and Anglican families believe in some form of Real Presence. As a Presbyterian, I fall into the Reformed camp, and believe in what is sometimes called "spiritual presence", i.e. that we actually encounter Christ's body and blood in communion, but that this happens through the mediation of the Holy Spirit, and that the contact is not localized in the bread and wine. Lutherans and Anglicans generally do localize the presence in the elements in one way or another, but without believing in transubstantiation. The "low church" folks, which would include Baptists, generally see it as a memorial. Presumably they also expect to encounter Christ, but only as they would in any act of worship. As for the liturgy, every denomination has its own. There is no specific prayer of consecration that is considered essential by all Protestants. The only things I would consider to be essential to a Communion are the use of bread and wine (uh... fruit of the vine), and the use of the "words of institution". These may be taken either from the account of the last supper in the Synoptics (e.g. Mk 14:22 before the bread and Mk 14:23-25 before the cup) or from I Cor (I Cor 11:23-24 before the bread and I Cor 11:25 before the cup). All versions include the words "this is my body". Of course any actual liturgy will contain more than this. I generally prefer a liturgy that has more of the traditional elements. But I'd say that the only invariable parts of the liturgy are those two. This is exactly parallel to Baptism, where the two requirements are the use of water and the words "I baptize you in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" (and "the intent to do what the Church does", i.e. that it is intended to be a Christian sacrament, and not part of a play, etc.). Plastic cups are not of course a Protestant requirement. I've used a common loaf and common cup. If people drink directly from the cup, wine with a certain percent alcohol must be used, for sanitary reasons. More commonly, a common cup is administered by "intinction", i.e. dipping a hunk of bread into the cup. There are also several ways of having the congregation participate. Some sit in their seats and have the elements passed around. Others come forward in groups and kneel at the front. The old Presbyterian method (almost never used anymore) was to have tables at the front, and have people come in groups to sit at the table. There are also differences in age requirements. The Presbyterian Church (USA) allows baptized children to participate, with no specific age limit. The implication is that they request it, and must have at least some understanding of the significance of the sacrament. This can make for some awkward moments for the server: do you offer to serve a little tyke? (This is one reason for using ordained deacons and elders to serve, I guess: on-the-spot policy decisions.) I would not be surprised to see stricter requirements in other churches. These days most Protestant churches have "open communion". This means that any (baptized?) Christian is invited to participate. This is normally made explicit in an invitation, given somewhere near the beginning. There are however some churches that still practice closed communion, sometimes for reasons of Church discipline (that is, they want to make sure that people are properly prepared) and sometimes because they want to restrict participation to those who have the same understanding of communion. I believe closed communion is now fairly rare, but I could be wrong. I've certainly never run into it (not even in Catholic churches, interestingly enough). By the way, it's fairly important not to use the term priest in this context for a Protestant minister. Priest implies that a sacrifice is being done, and Protestants generally (except maybe high church Anglicans?) do not believe they are sacrificing Christ again. --clh]