LOL, sure it was, you're just trying to wiggle out of it now.
You lack understanding. My words could have been clearer and I apologize.
Here is what you said in 50,602:
"what I said was that Christ is present in the priest performing sacraments. What is meant by that is not a physical presence, or a "real presence," but the recognition that spiritually, Christ is the one acting through the actions of the priest."
Yes, that is what I said. Christ works through the priest, so in that way He is present. The actions are those of Christ, not the priest. But He is not substantially present in the same "real" way that we talk about the elements of Communion.
The priest remains himself, he is not changed or transformed into Christ. He is simply an agent or a channel for Christ to do His work.
I'm sorry if you can't distinguish the difference, but that's all the more I have to say. Christ is present in the priest's "actions" is what I should have said. I shorthanded it to be present in the "priest" which seemed to have caused confusion.
I get it now, you say Christ is present in the priest, but not present, just working through the priest without being present, even though you say Christ is present.
Ridicule is not conducive to understanding. If that is your goal.
SD