The first thing I notice, a part from the fact that this is the first time I think I’ve seen you attempt to quote the Church Fathers. Is that you didn’t give the accompanying references to those quotes.
I’m not assigning deliberate deceitfulness on your part, but if you give the references as well, people can examine these quotes in context of document they came from.
I give precise references to all the Church Fathers, so that anyone can verify and reference them themselves.
Origen - “We have a symbol of gratitude to God in the bread which we call the Eucharist"
“And we have a symbolic of gratitude to God in the bread which we call the Eucharist . Besides, as we have shown before, the demons have not the control of those things which have been created for our use “ Origen Contra Celsus 8 Chpt 57
It is symbolic of our gratitude to God, not that the Eucharist is symbolic of the Flesh of Christ.
———————
Tertullian - This is My body,’ that is, the symbol of My body.
You accuse us of lifting Fathers quotes without context, this is a travesty.
“Then, having taken the bread and given it to His disciples, He made it His own body, by saying, ‘This is my body,’ that is, the figure of my body. A figure, however, there could not have been, unless there were first a veritable body…He did not understand how ancient was this figure of the body of Christ, who said Himself by Jeremiah: ‘I was like a lamb or an ox that is brought to the slaughter, and I knew not that they devised a device against me, saying, Let us cast the tree upon His bread,’ which means, of course, the cross upon His body. And thus, casting light, as He always did, upon the ancient prophecies, He declared plainly enough what He meant by the bread, when He called the bread His own body. He likewise, when mentioning the cup and making the new testament to be sealed ‘in His blood,’ affirms the reality of His body. For no blood can belong to a body which is not a body of flesh. If any sort of body were presented to our view, which is not one of flesh, not being fleshly, it would not possess blood. Thus, from the evidence of the flesh, we get a proof of the body, and a proof of the flesh from the evidence of the blood.” Tertullian, Against Marcion, 40 (A.D. 212).
————————-
Justin Martyr - “the bread which our Christ gave us to offer in remembrance of the Body which He assumed for the sake of those who believe in Him, for whom He also suffered, and also to the cup which He taught us to offer in the Eucharist, in commemoration of His blood"
“Now it is evident, that in this prophecy [allusion is made] to the bread which our Christ gave us to eat, in remembrance of His being made flesh for the sake of His believers, for whom also He suffered; and to the cup which He gave us to drink, in remembrance of His own blood, with giving of thanks.” Justin Martyr Dialogue with Trypho Ch 70.
Yes it is a remembrance in the same sense that the Passover was a remembrance, where the Passover was made present to all Israel throughout time.
But Justin also states very clearly.
“For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Saviour, having been made flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh.” Justin Martyr, First Apology, 66 (c. A.D. 110-165).
—————————
Clement of Alexandria - "The Scripture, accordingly, has named wine the symbol of the sacred blood”
“For the blood of the grape–that is, the Word–desired to be mixed with water, as His blood is mingled with salvation. And the blood of the Lord is twofold. For there is the blood of His flesh, by which we are redeemed from corruption; and the spiritual, that by which we are anointed. And to drink the blood of Jesus, is to become partaker of the Lord’s immortality; the Spirit being the energetic principle of the Word, as blood is of flesh. Accordingly, as wine is blended with water, so is the Spirit with man. And the one, the mixture of wine and water, nourishes to faith; while the other, the Spirit, conducts to immortality. And the mixture of both–of the water and of the Word–is called Eucharist, renowned and glorious grace; and they who by faith partake of it are sanctified both in body and soul.” Clement of Alexandria, The Instructor, 2 (ante A.D. 202).
This quote you give is truly lifting from the Fathers without context.
————— —
Cyprian - “I marvel much whence this practice has arisen, that in some places, contrary to Evangelical and Apostolic discipline, water is offered in the Cup of the Lord, which alone cannot represent the Blood of Christ”
In context and full quote.
“For because Christ bore us all, in that He also bore our sins, we see that in the water is understood the people, but in the wine is showed the blood of Christ…Thus, therefore, in consecrating the cup of the Lord, water alone cannot be offered, even as wine alone cannot be offered. For if any one offer wine only, the blood of Christ is dissociated from us; but if the water be alone, the people are dissociated from Christ; but when both are mingled, and are joined with one another by a close union, there is completed a spiritual and heavenly sacrament. Thus the cup of the Lord is not indeed water alone, nor wine alone, unless each be mingled with the other; just as, on the other hand, the body of the Lord cannot be flour alone or water alone, unless both should be united and joined together and compacted in the mass of one bread; in which very sacrament our people are shown to be made one, so that in like manner as many grains, collected, and ground, and mixed together into one mass, make one bread; so in Christ, who is the heavenly bread, we may know that there is one body, with which our number is joined and united.” Cyprian, To Caeilius, Epistle 62(63):13 (A.D. 253).
I can see that the quote you offer is a lifting without the context. Cyprian is perfectly Catholic in his understanding here.
—————————
Eusebius - "For with the wine which was indeed the symbol of His blood, . . . to give them bread to use as the symbol of His Body".
I couldn’t find where you lifted this one. But the Eucharist is both real and has symbolism. Symbolism does not negate the reality.
—— ————————
Augustine - “Understand spiritually what I said; you are not to eat this body which you see; nor to drink that blood which they who will crucify me shall pour forth. . . . Although it is needful that this be visibly celebrated, yet it must be spiritually understood”
Check out these clear quotes of Augustine, with references.
The bread which you see on the altar is, sanctified by the word of God, the body of Christ; that chalice, or rather what is contained in the chalice, is, sanctified by the word of God, the blood of Christ. {Sermo 227; on p.377}
Christ bore Himself in His hands, when He offered His body saying: “this is my body.”{Enarr. in Ps. 33 Sermo 1, 10; on p.377}
Nobody eats this flesh without previously adoring it. {Enarr. in Ps. 98, 9; on p.387}
[Referring to the sacrifice of Melchizedek (Gen 14:18 ff.)] The sacrifice appeared for the first time there which is now offered to God by Christians throughout the whole world. {City of God, 16, 22; on p.403}
Christ is both the priest, offering Himself, and Himself the Victim. He willed that the sacramental sign of this should be the daily sacrifice of the Church. {Ibid, 10, 20; on p.99}
He took flesh from the flesh of Mary . . . and gave us the same flesh to be eaten unto salvation . . . we do sin by not adoring. {Explanations of the Psalms, 98, 9; on p.20}
Not all bread, but only that which receives the blessing of Christ, becomes Christ’s body.{Ibid., 234, 2; on p.31}
