[Claud]

That link you posted is—forgive me—ridiculous. It presents selective quotations from the Fathers to get a “negative” verdict on the Real Presence. Normally what we do in scholarship is that we don’t leave out quotes that undermine our position and pretend they are not there.

Yes, there are plenty of Fathers that speak of the Eucharist as a symbol. But NONE of them say that it is ONLY a symbol. It is to them a symbol AND a reality.

Here are the quotes your source conveniently left out. Now how your esteemed scholar purports to defend his position in the face of these I have no blessed idea:

http://www.therealpresence.org/eucharst/father/a5.html

[Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus]

Well, since I wrote the article, I'd respond by simply turning your own accusation back at you, in fact even more so - your source cites the patristics out-of-context and uses non-foundational quotations to try to imply a meaning to the words of the patristics that doesn't jive with what they've said specifically on the subject elsewhere, whereas my quotes are from passages which specifically pertain to the subject, instead of oblique references which can be "spun" to a meaning that they don't necessarily have. For instance, your source cites Augustine several times,

"He who made you men, for your sakes was Himself made man; to ensure your adoption as many sons into an everlasting inheritance, the blood of the Only-Begotten has been shed for you. If in your own reckoning you have held yourselves cheap because of your earthly frailty, now assess yourselves by the price paid for you; meditate, as you should, upon what you eat, what you drink, to what you answer 'Amen'".

There's nothing in this quotation that states that the bread and wine become the body and blood of Christ. In fact, there's nothing in that cite which necessarily even indicates Augustine was talking about the Lord's Supper at all. Likewise,

"You ought to know what you have received, what you are going to receive, and what you ought to receive daily. That Bread which you see on the altar, having been sanctified by the word of God, is the Body of Christ. The chalice, or rather, what is in that chalice, having been sanctified by the word of God, is the Blood of Christ."

Again, this quotation relies upon a leading assumption - one must already believe the Roman Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation before it becomes apparent that Augustine is supporting that doctrine. Otherwise, the citation could be made to support ANY view. I mean, *I* would affirm that the bread and wine are the body and blood of Christ, but would take that symbolically (which, however, does not make the assertion any less real). In light of what Augustine clearly said elsewhere when he specifically stated what his view about the elements of the Lord's Supper were, his citation here can just as easily be symbolic as literal. Similarly....

"For the whole Church observes this practice which was handed down by the Fathers: that it prayers for those who have died in the communion of the Body and Blood of Christ, when they are commemorated in their own place in the sacrifice itself; and the sacrifice is offered also in memory of them on their behalf."

....requires that one already hold to Catholic dogma before one sees that it is "obvious" that the communion of which Augustine speaks is a reference to transubstantiate. There is nothing in this statement which INDEPENDENTLY establishes that Augustine was speaking of transubstantiation. As for the last of his statement,

"The fact that our fathers of old offered sacrifices with beasts for victims, which the present-day people of God read about but do not do, is to be understood in no way but this: that those things signified the things that we do in order to draw near to God and to recommend to our neighbor the same purpose. A visible sacrifice, therefore, is the sacrament, that is to say, the sacred sign, of an invisible sacrifice. . . . 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, who, since the Church is His body and He the Head, learns to offer herself through Him."

This actually would seem to argue AGAINST the Catholic position. He refers to the commemoration of the Lord's Supper as a sacramental sign (a term which usually indicates the figurativeness of its relationship with what it symbolises). Augustine is incorrect in supposing that the keeping of the communion is a "sacrifice" of Christ (since there's quite a lot in Hebrews 7-10 which flatly destroys that thesis), but be that as it may, his words, again, don't support the doctrine of transubstantiation specifically, as your source tries to imply.

That's all for now, since I'll be away from internet access for the rest of the evening. Feel free to respond, or to FReepmail me if you like. I also want to thank you for the link to the Realpresence site - I actually have been planning on updating the Transubstantiation page, and it will prove a valuable information source.