“I haven’t got the strength to read it all.”
Find it. Its worth the read and then thinking about it.
“How accurate is this with respect to the Orthodox?”
I think it is remarkably if not completely accurate, considering the source. The priest certainly is at a certain level representing the people in the Eucharistic Community in his liturgical role and as the representative of the bishop he is also an Icon Of Christ. The description of the epiklesis is a good one and is eminently Trinitarian.
“the request for the Holy Spirit to make the bread and wine the body and blood of Christ and to sanctify both the elements and the community.”
This is almost exactly the prayer of the priest at the epiklesis.
As you may have noticed, Alex, I have felt that true Anglicans are surprisingly Orthodox in certain aspects of their theology, more so even than most Latins of the past 1000 years. In that sense I think they have preserved pieces of the original Orthodoxy of the very early Church of Britain and Scotland. It may be that this “Orthodox race memory” explains in part the ease with which most converts from Anglicanism to Orthodoxy make the transition.
I learn by arguing, so I encourage Huber to post this as an "ecumenical" thread.
The opening paragraph, especially the one I cited, grokked it for me. That is indeed a significant difference in understanding of the Liturgy and therefore priesthood. I wasn't aware of this.
I have a slightly different theory. Anglicanism has often had an element of the academy and of studying the classics. Many of Rome's strongest intellectuals (Cardinal Newman and Christopher Dawson are two examples) have also had an Anglican origin. Orthodox theology has very strongly incorporated the intellectual tradition of classical Greece, and it is this marriage of both intellect and tradition that is culturally appealing to many Anglicans, as is also Scholaticism (K - I know that you shudder at the thought!)