Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: mangoe@cs.umd.edu (Charley Wingate) Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: Re: Capital Sins and Capital Virtues Message-ID: Date: 15 Nov 89 08:22:04 GMT Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu Organization: U of Maryland, Dept. of Computer Science, Coll. Pk., MD 20742 Lines: 24 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu Our Fearless Moderator writes: >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. Sorry, but this isn't correct. The Episcopal minister whose part is to read the eucharistic prayer and the words of institution, and who breaks the bread, is a priest-- whether high or low. Trying to get a firm grip on which presiding minister is a priest and which is not is a slippery proposition. The key point seems to be this notion of "sacrament". Regardless of the speicific details, this is one point where the anglicans are close akin to the Roman Catholics (and the eastern churches) and quite apart from most other protestants. It seems that the reason priests are called such is that they are the chief representatives/ actors in the sacramental acts of the church. They are both sign and reality of the priesthood of believers. -- C. Wingate + "Our God, to whom we turn When weary with illusion, + Whose stars serenely burn Above this earth's confusion, mangoe@cs.umd.edu + Thine is the mighty plan, The steadfast order sure mimsy!mangoe + In which the world began, Endures, and shall endure."