I will go in the same order that Kelly went in his video. Now because this is a long paper, if one does not want to go through each church figure, one can go to each figure one is interested in directly, by pressing the internal link to each church figure.

So, the first person he uses is Tertullian. Now Tertullian ends up being a heretic, a Montanist, is not a church father, in fact 3 of the ones that Kelly cites are not true Church Fathers. However, Tertullian was indeed a significant figure who started off Orthodox and much of his writings, before he went full scale Montanist, is at least worth considering.

Here is what Kelly quotes from Tertullian, time stamp is 31:20- 33:45, his writing against Marcion Book 4 chapters 40-41

4:40 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. An empty thing, or phantom, is incapable of a figure.

He likewise, when mentioning the cup and making the new testament to be sealed in His blood, Luke 22:20 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, Book 4, chapter 40, Anti-Nicene Fathers, vol. 3, p. 418.

He represents the bleeding condition of His flesh under the metaphor of garments dyed in red, as if reddened in the treading and crushing process of the wine-press, from which the labourers descend reddened with the wine-juice, like men stained in blood. Much more clearly still does the book of Genesis foretell this, when (in the blessing of Judah, out of whose tribe Christ was to come according to the flesh) it even then delineated Christ in the person of that patriarch, saying, He washed His garments in wine, and His clothes in the blood of grapes Genesis 49:11 https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/03124.htm Tertullian, Against Marcion, Book 4, Chapter 40, Phillip Schaff, Anti-Nicene Fathers, vol. 3, pp. 418-419.

Let us look at what Church historian, Darwell Stone, well known Church Historian says in his book, in reference to Tertullians use of the word 'figure':

"In describing the Incarnation Tertullian uses the phrase 'caro FIGURATUS' to denote that our Lord received in the womb of His Virgin Mother not only the appearance but also the REALITY of flesh [Apol 21; cf. Adv Marc iv,21]. He says that our Lord made known to the Apostles 'the form ( FIGURA) of His voice' [Scorp 12]. He uses the word 'figura' in the sense of a main point in, or head of, a discussion [Adv Marc ii,21]. Elsewhere he denotes by it the prophetic anticipation of an event afterwards to be fulfilled [De Monog 6 -- the Latin is provided in note]." Darwell Stone, A History of the Doctrine of the Holy Eucharist, Volume 1, Longmans, Green, and Co. New York, Bombay, and Calcutta, 1909, pp. 30,31

Stone then gives six clear examples of Tertullian's literal view –Darwell Stone, page 37. In the book he gives a citation and one or two words in passing. I will quote word for word what Stone writes, then I will give a little more detail of each Tertullian passage he speaks to, so more can be seen of what Tertullian is actually saying. If I can find the citation online, I will provide a link to it so anybody can see for him/her self.

Stone, pp. 36-37

Since the Incarnation Sacraments have become necessary and effectual; and that which is the ordinances of the Church touches the flesh benefits the soul. It is in harmony with these general sacramental principles that Tertullian not only calls the Eucharist (1)"the holy thing".

For how monstrous it is to go from God's church to the devil's--from the sky to the stye,22 as they say; to raise your hands to God, and then to weary them in the applause of an actor; out of the mouth, from which you uttered Amen over the Holy Thing, to give witness in a gladiator's favour; to cry "forever" to any one else but God and Christ! https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0303.htm Tertullian, On the Spactacles, or De spactac. 25, Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 3

Stone next notes the reverence towards the Eucharist:

(2) It is a matter of anxious care that no drop of the wine or fragment of the bread should fall to the ground (De cor 3). Stone, p. 37.

We take also, in congregations before daybreak, and from the hand of none but the presidents, the sacrament of the Eucharist, which the Lord both commanded to be eaten at meal-times, and enjoined to be taken by all alike.10 As often as the anniversary comes round, we make offerings for the dead as birthday honours. …We feel pained should any wine or bread, even though our own, be cast upon the ground. https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0304.htm Tertullian, The Chaplet, chapter 3, Anti-Nicene Fathers, volume 3, p. 94.

(3) It was the Lord's body which the disciples received at the Last Supper (Adv Marc iv,40) Stone, p. 37 .

Against Marcion 4:40, 210 AD.

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, Luke 22:20 affirms the reality of His body. For no blood can belong to a body which is not a body of flesh. https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/03124.htm, Tertullian, Anti-Nicene fathers, Against Marcion vol. 3, p. 418.

(4) It is the Lord's body which the communicant receives in the Church or reserves for his Communion at home (De orat 19).On orations 19: Stone, p. 37

Similarly, too, touching the days of Stations, most think that they must not be present at the sacrificial prayers, on the ground that the Station must be dissolved by reception of the Lord's Body. Does, then, the Eucharist cancel a service devoted to God, or bind it more to God? Will not your Station be more solemn if you have withal stood at God's altar? When the Lord's Body has been received and reserved each point is secured, both the participation of the sacrifice and the discharge of duty. If the Station has received its name from the example of military life — for we withal are God's military — of course no gladness or sadness chanting to the camp abolishes the stations of the soldiers: for gladness will carry out discipline more willingly, sadness more carefully. https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0322.htm Tertullian On Prayer, 19. Anti-Nicene Fathers, vol. 3, p. 687.

Stone next notes what Tertullian notes what his body and blood does:

(5) It is Christ's body and blood with which "the flesh is clothed, so that the soul also may be made fat by God" (De carn res 8). Stone, p. 37

"The truth is that the flesh is the very condition on which salvation hinges. And since the soul is, in consequence of its salvation, chosen for the service of God, it is the flesh which actually renders it capable of such service. The flesh, indeed, is washed, in order that the soul may be cleansed; the flesh is anointed, that the soul may be consecrated; the flesh is signed (with the cross), that the soul too may be fortified; the flesh is shadowed with the imposition of hands, that the soul also may be illuminated by the Spirit; the flesh feeds on the body and blood of Christ, that the soul likewise may fatten on its God. They cannot then be separated in their recompense, when they are united in their service. Those sacrifices, moreover, which are acceptable to God — I mean conflicts of the soul, fasting, and abstinences, and the humiliations which are annexed to such duty — it is the flesh which performs again and again to its own special suffering. https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0316.htm Tertullian On the Resurrection of the Flesh, 8. Anti-Nicene Fathers, vol. 3, p. 581.

Stone continues in his reference to Tertullian:

(6) Even in unworthy Communions it is the body of the Lord which wicked hands approach, the body of the Lord which wicked men outrage and offend (De idol 7). On idols Stone, p. 37.

7) Chapter 7. Grief of the Faithful at the Admission of Idol-Makers into the Church; Nay, Even into the Ministry
A whole day the zeal of faith will direct its pleadings to this quarter: bewailing that a Christian should come from idols into the Church; should come from an adversary workshop into the house of God; should raise to God the Father hands which are the mothers of idols; should pray to God with the hands which, out of doors, are prayed to in opposition to God; should apply to the Lord's body those hands which confer bodies on demons. Nor is this sufficient. Grant that it be a small matter, if from other hands they receive what they contaminate; but even those very hands deliver to others what they have contaminated. Idol-artificers are chosen even into the ecclesiastical order. Oh wickedness! Once did the Jews lay brands on Christ; these mangle His body daily. Oh hands to be cut off! Now let the saying, If your hand make you do evil, amputate it, Matthew 18:8 see to it whether it were uttered by way of similitude merely. What hands more to be amputated than those in which scandal is done to the Lord's body? https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0302.htm Tertullian, On Idolatry, 211-212 AD, Anti-Nicene Fathers, vol. 3, p. 64.

Next, we go to Kelly's comments on the Didache Didache 33:52-37.50

He quotes from the Didache 9-10. First he highlights 9:

Now concerning the Eucharist, give thanks this way. First, concerning the cup: We thank thee, our Father, for the holy vine of David Thy servant, which You madest known to us through Jesus Thy Servant; to Thee be the glory for ever. And concerning the broken bread: We thank Thee, our Father, for the life and knowledge which You madest known to us through Jesus Thy Servant; to Thee be the glory for ever. Even as this broken bread was scattered over the hills, and was gathered together and became one, so let Thy Church be gathered together from the ends of the earth into Thy kingdom; for Thine is the glory and the power through Jesus Christ for ever..But let no one eat or drink of your Eucharist, unless they have been baptized into the name of the Lord; for concerning this also the Lord has said, " Give not that which is holy to the dogs."

Blessed are you, Lord God of all creation,
for through your goodness we have received the wine we offer you:
fruit of the vine and work of human hands,
it will become our spiritual drink. https://www.catholicbridge.com/catholic/catholic-mass-full-text.php Liturgy of the Eucharist, Preparation of the Altar and the Gifts

Kelly said it only speaks to the Eucharist in chapters 9 and 10. Now, perhaps Kelly is not aware of Chapter 14, because that also relates to the Eucharist quite importantly. But any analysis of the Didache in reference to the Eucharist, must include chapter 14.

Chapter 14. Christian Assembly on the Lord's Day.
But every Lord's day gather yourselves together, and break bread, and give thanksgiving after having confessed your transgressions, that your sacrifice may be pure. But let no one who is at odds with his fellow come together with you, until they be reconciled, that your sacrifice may not be profaned. For this is that which was spoken by the Lord: Malachi 1:11"In every place and time offer to me a pure sacrifice; for I am a great King, says the Lord, and my name is wonderful among the nations." All the quotations from the Didache are found here. https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0714.htm

So, in sum the Didache reflects Catholic truth in perhaps giving part of a Eucharistic prayer, says only the Baptized get to partake of what is holy. And it shows that partaking of the Eucharist leads to eternal life. It shows that there is a sacrament of confession before one can partake of what is truly holy. And that the Eucharist is the fulfillment of Malachi 1:11-12.

St. Justin Martyr 37:54-38:27

Kelly next points us to St. Justin Martyr. Kind of unbelievable to point us to a Saint who actually uses the word equivalent to the word transubstantiation, which we will see down below. Anybody who has studied St. Justin Martyr, knows that he shows how Christians worshipped in a Catholic Liturgy and shows during the Eucharistic sacrifice, what is bread and wine changes into something a lot greater than bread and wine. Now here Kelly quotes him in passing without saying much, after quoting this passage he says 'it is not literal.' Again, the Church has never used the word 'literal' in describing the true presence of Christ in the Eucharist. He colors red again something that he thinks is his point against transubstantiation.

St. Justin Martyr Dialogue with Trypho 70, 155 AD:

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. https://www.newadvent.org/fathers /01286.htm Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho 70, Anti-Nicene Fathers, vol. 1, p.234.

In this very letter, in Justin Martyr Dialogue with Trypho, 155 AD, he shows us that the Eucharist is a sacrifice.

"And the offering of fine flour, sirs," I said, "which was prescribed to be presented on behalf of those purified from leprosy, was a type of the bread of the Eucharist, the celebration of which our Lord Jesus Christ prescribed, in remembrance of the suffering which He endured on behalf of those who are purified in soul from all iniquity, in order that we may at the same time thank God for having created the world, with all things therein, for the sake of man, and for delivering us from the evil in which we were, and for utterly overthrowing principalities and powers by Him who suffered according to His will. Hence God speaks by the mouth of Malachi, one of the twelve [prophets], as I said before, about the sacrifices at that time presented by you: 'I have no pleasure in you, saith the Lord; and I will not accept your sacrifices at your hands: for, from the rising of the sun unto the going down of the same, My name has been glorified among the Gentiles, and in every place incense is offered to My name, and a pure offering: for My name is great among the Gentiles, saith the Lord: but ye profane it.' He then speaks of those Gentiles, namely us, who in every place offer sacrifices to Him, i.e., the bread of the Eucharist, and also the cup of the Eucharist, affirming both that we glorify His name, and that you profane . The command of circumcision, again, bidding [them] always circumcise the children on the eighth day, was a type of the true circumcision, by which we are circumcised from deceit and iniquity through Him who rose from the dead on the first day after the Sabbath, [namely through] our Lord Jesus Christ. For the first day after the Sabbath, remaining the first of all the days, is called, however, the eighth, according to the number of all the days of the cycle, and [yet] remains the first. https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/01283.htm Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho, chapter 41, Anti-Nicene Fathers, vol. 1 p. 215.

In remembrance and commemoration, exactly we remember and commemorate. It is a sacrifice, the very word anamnesis means it is a sacrifice and making present. The context of this statement, which can be seen in the link that I gave in chapter 70. It is a passing reference comparing the offering of the Eucharist and that Christians do not offer sacrifice to the false gods of the Roman empire. Doesn’t go into detail here, but there is nothing about being a mere symbol. It is quickly a mention of the Eucharist when comparing that Christians do not offer sacrifice to false gods.

Justin Martyr was arguing from Scripture that there was a type of Eucharist in the Old Testament. Bread was used in commemoration of those who were purified from leprosy, was a type of Eucharist. The fulfillment is that Jesus purifies us from iniquity. He delivers us from evil, truly, not just in a forensic lens, the Protestant concept. In chapter 40 just before then, he talks about how Jesus was a lamb of God. His opposition, the Jews thought the sacrifice in Malachi 1, was a Jewish sacrifice. But St. Justin Martyr shows that Malachi is rejecting the Jewish sacrifice, but lauding the sacrifice that would be offered by the Gentiles, and that is his death on cross being represented in the Holy Eucharist.

Justin Martyr elsewhere specifically mentions the equivalent of transubstantiation in the following.

First Apology

Chapter 66. Of the Eucharist And this food is called among us Εὐχαριστία [the Eucharist], of which no no one is allowed to partake but the man who believes that the things which we teach are true, and who has been washed with the washing that is for the remission of sins, and unto regeneration, and who is so living as Christ has enjoined. 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 by the Word of God, had both 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. For the apostles, in the memoirs composed by them, which are called Gospels, have thus delivered unto us what was enjoined upon them; that Jesus took bread, and when He had given thanks, said, This do in remembrance of Me, Luke 22:19 this is My body; and that, after the same manner, having taken the cup and given thanks, He said, This is My blood; and gave it to them alone. , Which the wicked devils have imitated in the mysteries of Mithras, commanding the same thing to be done. For, that bread and a cup of water are placed with certain incantations in the mystic rites of one who is being initiated, you either know or can learn. https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0126.htm Justin Martyr First Apology, 66, Anti-Nicene Fathers, Volume 1, p.185.

Next, Kelly quotes Clement of Alexandria and Origen 38:28-52

He just reads it without commentary, just sort of thinking that quoting it means they believe it is a symbol only. Let us go to Clement of Alexandria, he is the first one in Kelly's take that uses the word 'symbol.'

Clement of Alexandria, Instructions 2:2

The Scripture, accordingly, has named wine the symbol of the sacred blood. Instructions 2:2 https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/02092.htm Clement of Alexandria, Instructions 2:2. Anti-Nicene Fathers, vol. 2, p. 245.

'What we nowadays,' he writes, 'understand by "symbol" is a thing which is not that which it represents; at that time "symbol" denoted a thing which in some kind of way REALLY IS what it signifies...What we now call "symbol" is something wholly different from what was so called by the ancient Church.' [HISTORY OF DOGMA, ii,144; iv,289]., available online here: https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/19613/pg19613-images.html

Occasionally these writers use language which has been held to imply that, for all its realist sound, their use of the terms ‘body’ and ‘blood’ may after all be merely symbolical. Tertullian, for example, refers to the bread as ‘a figure’ ( figura) of Christ’s body, and once speaks of ‘the bread by which he represents (repraesentat) his very body’ (Early Christian Doctrines, 212). However, Kelly warns: “Yet we should be cautious about interpreting such expressions in a modern fashion. According to ancient modes of thought a mysterious relationship existed between the thing symbolized and its symbol, figure or type; the symbol in some sense was the thing symbolized. JND Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines, Harper & Row Publishers, San Francisco, 1960, Revised Edition, p. 212

The question of the meaning of such words in connection with the Eucharist will recur again in a later period. It may be sufficient here to express the warning that to suppose that 'symbol' in Clement of Alexandria or 'figure' in Tertullian must mean the same as in modern speech would be to assent to a line of thought which is GRAVELY MISLEADING." Darwell Stone, vol 1, A History of the Doctrine of the Holy Eucharist, Longmans, Greens, and Co., 1909, pg 31.

With reason, therefore, the apostle enjoins, Be not drunk with wine, in which there is much excess; by the term excess (ἀσωτία) intimating the inconsistence of drunkenness with salvation (τὸ ἄσωστον). For if He made water wine at the marriage, He did not give permission to get drunk. He gave life to the watery element of the meaning of the law, filling with His blood the doer of it who is of Adam, that is, the whole world; supplying piety with drink from the vine of truth, the mixture of the old law and of the new word, in order to the fulfilment of the predestined time. The Scripture, accordingly, has named wine the symbol of the sacred blood; but reproving the base tippling with the dregs of wine, it says: "Intemperate is wine, and insolent is drunkenness. Proverbs 20:1 It is agreeable, therefore, to right reason, to drink on account of the cold of winter, till the numbness is dispelled from those who are subject to feel it; and on other occasions as a medicine for the intestines. For, as we are to use food to satisfy hunger, so also are we to use drink to satisfy thirst, taking the most careful precautions against a slip: for the introduction of wine is perilous. https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/02092.htmClement of Alexandria, Instructions 2:2. Anti-Nicene Fathers, Vol.2 p. 245.

He is not giving a discourse on the Eucharist, the quote that Kelly quoted was 12 words. It is in the midst of telling people not to get drunk. He is not giving a discourse on the full meaning of the Eucharist. But Catholics do not reject that there is some symbolism. The Council of Trent uses the words symbolism directly in reference to the Eucharist four times, and the Catechism speaks of symbolism twice, so this is absolutely no proof of the matter. Here he is just excoriating people for getting drunk. He says it in passing, and here he is not speaking of the Eucharist in reference to a detailed explanation of what it is. He actually did do that and we will see that next. In any case, as these historians note, symbolism in many cases equals the reality.

A much more thorough examination of the use of figure, symbol and eucharist, with more thorough examination than given here is available here: https://www.catholicfidelity.com/apologetics-topics/eucharist/tertullian-st-cyprian-and-st-clement-of-alexandria-on-the-eucharist-by-phil-porvaznik But let's go to back to this same book of St. Clement of Alexandria. Clement of Alexandria, book 2 chapter 2, 202 AD, there is a more detailed look at the Eucharist at the very beginning of the chapter:

Afterwards the sacred vine produced the prophetic cluster. This was a sign to them, when trained from wandering to their rest; representing the great cluster the Word, bruised for us. 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. For the divine mixture, man, the Father's will has mystically compounded by the Spirit and the Word. For, in truth, the spirit is joined to the soul, which is inspired by it; and the flesh, by reason of which the Word became flesh, to the Word. Clement of Alexandria, The Instructor, book 2 chapter 2, Anti-Nicene Fathers, vol. 2, pp. 242-243.

St. Clement will speak of metaphor and symbol, but at the same time speak of the reality of the Eucharist as true flesh and blood. In this very title Instructor, but Book 1 chapter 5, he does this. Both/And, not either/or. St. Clement of Alexandria, Instructor, Book 1 Chapter 5 says the following, 202 AD:

Elsewhere the Lord, in the Gospel according to John, brought this out by symbols, when He said: "Eat ye my flesh, and drink my blood; " describing distinctly by metaphor the drinkable properties of faith and the promise, by means of which the Church, like a human being consisting of many members, is refreshed and grows, is welded together and compacted of both,--of faith, which is the body, and of hope, which is the soul; as also the Lord of flesh and blood. For in reality the blood of faith is hope, in which faith is held as by a vital principle. https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/02091.htm St. Clement of Alexandria, Instructor, Book 1 Anti-Nicene Fathers, vol. 2, Chapter 5, Anti-Nicene Fathers, p. 219.

I love to call her the Church. This mother, when alone, had not milk, because alone she was not a woman. But she is once virgin and mother--pure as a virgin, loving as a mother. And calling her children to her, she nurses them with holy milk, viz., with the Word for childhood. Therefore she had not milk; for the milk was this child fair and comely, the body of Christ, which nourishes by the Word the young brood, which the Lord Himself brought forth in throes of the flesh, which the Lord Himself swathed in His precious blood. O amazing birth! O holy swaddling bands! The Word is all to the child, both father and mother and tutor and nurse. "Eat ye my flesh," He says, "and drink my blood." Such is the suitable food which the Lord ministers, and He offers His flesh and pours forth His blood , and nothing is wanting for the children's growth. O amazing mystery l We are enjoined to cast off the old and carnal corruption, as also the old nutriment, receiving in exchange another new regimen, that of Christ, receiving Him if we can, to hide Him within; and that, enshrining the Saviour in our souls, we may correct the affections of our flesh. https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/02091.htm Clement of Alexandria, Instructor, Book 1, chapter 6, Anti-Nicene Fathers, vol. 2, p, 221.

Now Origen was a very influential writer. He did develop heresies like there were souls preordained to man. He also developed some thought that a universal salvation, including even the devil. However, he originally was orthodox and his writings can not be summarily dismissed.

Kelly quotes Origen, Against Celsius 8:57, 248 AD:

And we have a symbol of gratitude to God in the bread which we call the Eucharist.

Again, Celsus wishes us to be thankful to these demons, imagining that we owe them thank-offerings. But we, while recognising the duty of thankfulness, maintain that we show no ingratitude by refusing to give thanks to beings who do us no good, but who rather set themselves against us when we neither sacrifice to them nor worship them. We are much more concerned lest we should be ungrateful to God, who has loaded us with His benefits, whose workmanship we are, who cares for us in whatever condition we may be, and who has given us hopes of things beyond this present life. And we have a symbol 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; we commit no wrong, therefore, when we partake of created things, and yet refuse to offer sacrifices to beings who have no concern with them. https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/04168.htm Origen, Against Celsius, 8, Anti-Nicene Fathers volume 4, p. 661.

Origen against Celsus book 8:33:

It is not according to the law of God that any demon has had a share in worldly affairs, but it was by their own lawlessness that they perhaps sought out for themselves places destitute of the knowledge of God and of the divine life, or places where there are many enemies of God. Perhaps also, as being fit to rule over and punish them, they have been set by the Word, who governs all things, to rule over those who subjected themselves to evil and not to God. For this reason, then, let Celsus, as one who knows not God, give thank-offerings to demons. But we give thanks to the Creator of all, and, along with thanksgiving and prayer for the blessings we have received, we also eat the bread presented to us; and this bread becomes by prayer a sacred body, which sanctifies those who sincerely partake of it. Against Celsius, 8:33. Origen, Against Celsius, 8, Anti-Nicene Fathers volume 4, pp. 651-652.

You see how the ALTARS are no longer sprinkled with the blood of oxen, but consecrated BY THE PRECIOUS BLOOD OF CHRIST. (Homilies on Joshua 2:1)

Origen (Homilies on Exodus 13:3)

You are accustomed to take part in the divine mysteries, so you know how, when you have received THE BODY OF THE LORD, you reverently exercise every care lest a particle of it fall, and lest anything of the consecrated gift perish….how is it that you think neglecting the word of God a lesser crime than neglecting HIS BODY? Johannes Quasten, Patrology, Christian Classics Inc, Westminster, Maryland Vol 2, p. 86.

But if that text (Lev 24:5-9) is taken to refer to the greatness of what is mystically symbolized, then there is a 'commemoration' which has an EFFECT OF GREAT PROPITIATORY VALUE. If you apply it to that 'Bread which came down from heaven and gives life to the world,' that shewbread which 'God has offered to us as a means of reconciliation, in virtue of faith, ransoming us with his blood,' and if you look to that commemoration of which the Lord says, 'Do this in commemoration of me,' then you will find that this is the unique commemoration WHICH MAKES GOD PROPITIOUS TO MEN.

So, Origen though ending up being a heretic as universalist, even thinking the devil would be restored, and had the idea there was a preexistence of souls before humans came into existence, and used a lot of allegorical interpretations, and had a lot of theological issues, was still a significant figure, but did not believe the Eucharist was only a symbol.

Kelly then quotes Eusebius:
Eusebius 39:18-40:51

Eusebius of Caesarea, 325 AD Demonstrata Evangelica 8.1 76-80

"put off the old man with his deeds, and put on the new man which is renewed into knowledge in the image of Him that created him." The words, "His eyes are cheerful from wine, and his teeth white as milk," again I think secretly reveal the (c) mysteries of the new Covenant of our Saviour. "His eyes are cheerful from wine," seems to me to shew the gladness of the mystic wine which He gave to His disciples, when He said, "Take, drink; this is my blood that is shed for you for the remission of sins: this do in remembrance of me." And, "His teeth are white as milk," shew the brightness and purity of the sacramental food. For again, He gave Himself (d) the symbols of His divine dispensation to His disciples, when He bade them make the likeness of His own Body. For since He no more was to take pleasure in bloody sacrifices, or those ordained by Moses in the slaughter of animals of various kinds, and was to give them bread to use as the symbol of His Body, He taught the purity and brightness of such food by saying, "And his teeth are white as milk." This also another prophet has recorded, where he says, "Sacrifice and offering hast thou not required, but a body hast thou prepared for me." But these matters should be examined at leisure, for they require deeper criticism and longer interpretation. For the present I must refuse to enter on that great task, https://tertullian.org/fathers/eusebius_de_10_book8.htm Eusebius, Demonstratia Evangelica, Book 8, Chapter 1.

JND Kelly writes in reference to Eusebius and others who use similar language at this time:

It must not be supposed, of course, that this 'symbolical' language implied that the bread and wine were regarded as mere pointers to, or tokens or, absent realities. Rather were they accepted as signs of realities which were somehow actually present through apprehended by faith alone. JND Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines, pp. 441-442.

Since, then, Christ neither entered on His priesthood in time, nor sprang from the priestly tribe, nor was anointed with prepared and outward oil, nor will ever reach the |242 end of His priesthood, nor will be established only for the Jews but for all nations, for all these reasons He is rightly said to have forsaken the priesthood after Aaron's type, and to be a priest after the order of Melchizedek. And the fulfilment of the oracle is truly wondrous, to one who recognizes how our Saviour Jesus the Christ of God even now performs through His ministers even to-day in sacrifices after the manner of Melchizedek's. For just as he, who was priest of the Gentiles, is not represented as offering outward sacrifices, but as blessing Abraham only with wine and bread, in exactly the same way our Lord and Saviour Himself first, and then all His priests among all nations, perform the spiritual sacrifice according to the customs of the Church, and with wine and bread darkly express the mysteries of His Body and saving Blood. This by the Holy Spirit Melchizedek foresaw, and used the figures of what was to come, as the Scripture of Moses witnesses, when it says: "And Melchizedek, king of Salem, brought out bread and wine: and he was priest of the Most High God, and he blessed Abraham."
And thus it followed that only to Him with the addition of an oath:
"The Lord God sware, and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek." https://www.tertullian.org/fathers/eusebius_de_07_book5.htm Eusebius of Caesarea: Demonstratio Evangelica, Book 5, Chapter 3.

I want to give a full context on what Eusebius writes::

7. Also, they [i.e., the Jews], following Moses, would sacrifice the sheep of the Pascha once in the whole year, on the fourteenth day of the first month, at evening. We of the new covenant, on the other hand, who celebrate our own Pascha each Lord's day, always take our fill of the Savior's body, always partake of the blood of the Lamb; we have always girded the loins of our souls with chastity and self-control, we have always prepared our feet in readiness for the Gospel;[35] we always hold the staves in our hands, and rest on the rod that came forth from the root of Jesse;[36] we are always being set free from Egypt, we are always going in search of the wilderness of human life, we are always setting out on the journey toward God: We are always celebrating the Passover. For the Gospel's word [/ Word] wants us to do this, not once in the year, but always and every day. For this reason, we celebrate the festival of our Pascha every week, on the day of our Savior and Lord, carrying out the mysteries of the true Lamb, by whom we have been ransomed. And we do not circumcise our bodies with a blade—rather, we remove every evil of the soul by means of the sharp word [/Word]; nor do we make use of physical unleavened bread—but only the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth. For grace, having freed us from our former habits that had grown old, bestowed on us the new man, the one created in accordance with God, and the new Law, a new circumcision, a new Pascha, and the "Jew in secret." on De solemn, pasch. 7, On Easter, 7 https://www.tertullian.org/fathers/eusebius_on_easter.htm

Next Kelly points us to St. Athanasius:

St. Athanasius, 40:48-41:45

Festal Letter 4:19

Here is Festal letter 4:19, available at here, indeed in New Advent. https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/2806004.htm I did a search for the words of the translation, perhaps Now, I must be missing something, Festal Letter 4 I searched it, I searched Festal Letter 19 on New Advent Org, I searched everywhere for festal letter 4, the quote I can not find so can’t find a context. Now I did go to Festal Letter 4, 332 AD, and this is what I found in reference to the Eucharist:

For no longer were these things to be done which belonged to Jerusalem which is beneath; neither there alone was the feast to be celebrated, but wherever God willed it to be. Now He willed it to be in every place, so that ‘in every place incense and a sacrifice might be offered to Him233.’ For although, as in the historical account, in no other place might the feast of the Passover be kept save only in Jerusalem, yet when the things pertaining to that time were fulfilled, and those which belonged to shadows had passed away, and the preaching of the Gospel was about to extend everywhere; when indeed the disciples were spreading the feast in all places, they asked the Saviour, ‘Where wilt Thou that we shall make ready?’ The Saviour also, since He was changing the typical for the spiritual, promised them that they should no longer eat the flesh of a lamb, but His own, saying, ‘Take, eat and drink; this is My body, and My blood234.’ When we are thus nourished by these things, we also, my beloved, shall truly keep the feast of the Passover. https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/2806004.htm St. Athanasius, Festal Letter 4:4, Nicene and Post Nicene Fathers, Second Series, Vol. 4, pp, 516-517.

Protestants use this 4:19, that must be somewhere else, to show it is symbolic. I can not find it, under letter 4, perhaps there is another letter, another festal Letter, just not on an online edition that I can find, and the Schaff book, after 4:5 it says: Here endeth the fourth Festal Letter of holy Athanasius. But let us look at the passage itself. Maybe there are multiple Festal Letter 4, just can not find it in either New Advent, or the Schaff edition. Though I can't find it, to find a context, what of the content?

“[W]hat He says is not fleshly but spiritual, For how many would the body suffice for eating, that it should become the food for the whole world? But for this reason He made mention of the ascension of the Son of Man into heaven, in order that He might draw them away from the bodily notion, “[W]hat He says is not fleshly but spiritual and that from henceforth they might learn that the aforesaid flesh was heavenly eating from above and spiritual food given by Him.”

St. Athanasius,-"Sermon to the Newly Baptized" 373 AD,

You shall see the Levites bringing loaves and a cup of wine, and placing them on the table. So long as the prayers of supplication and entreaties have not been made, there is only bread and wine. But after the great and wonderful prayers have been completed, then the bread is become the Body, and the wine the Blood, of our Lord Jesus Christ. 'And again:'

Let us approach the celebration of the mysteries. This bread and this wine, so long as the prayers and supplications have not taken place, remain simply what they are. But after the great prayers and holy supplications have been sent forth, the Word comes down into the bread and wine – and thus His Body is confected. St, Athanasius. "Sermon to the Newly Baptized" ante 373 A.D. Jurgens, vol. 2, 802, p. 345-345.

Next, Kelly speaks about St. Augustine as his next example:

St. Augustine 41:52- 42:23

Kelly quotes a selected portion of St. Augustine's homily on Psalm 99. Yes, he pulled it up from New Advent, he is focusing on a selected portion. Let us look at what Kelly highlights and puts in red.

Exposition of the Psalms Augustine 99:8

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. I have commended unto you a certain mystery; spiritually understood, it will quicken. Although it is needful that this be visibly celebrated, yet it must be spiritually understood.

For He took upon Him earth from earth; because flesh is from earth, and He received flesh from the flesh of Mary. And because He walked here in very flesh, and gave that very flesh to us to eat for our salvation; and no one eats that flesh, unless he has first worshipped: we have found out in what sense such a footstool of our Lord's may be worshipped, and not only that we sin not in worshipping it, but that we sin in not worshipping. But does the flesh give life? Our Lord Himself, when He was speaking in praise of this same earth, said, It is the Spirit that quickens, the flesh profits nothing....But when our Lord praised it, He was speaking of His own flesh, and He had said, Except a man eat My flesh, he shall have no life in him. John 6:54 Some disciples of His, about seventy, were offended, and said, This is an hard saying, who can hear it? And they went back, and walked no more with Him. It seemed unto them hard that He said, Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man, you have no life in you: they received it foolishly, they thought of it carnally, and imagined that the Lord would cut off parts from His body, and give unto them; and they said, This is a hard saying. It was they who were hard, not the saying; for unless they had been hard, and not meek, they would have said to themselves, He says not this without reason, but there must be some latent mystery herein. They would have remained with Him, softened, not hard: and would have learned that from Him which they who remained, when the others departed, learned. For when twelve disciples had remained with Him, on their departure, these remaining followers suggested to Him, as if in grief for the death of the former, that they were offended by His words, and turned back. But He instructed them, and says unto them, It is the Spirit that quickens, but the flesh profits nothing; the words that I have spoken unto you, they are spirit, and they are life. John 6:63 Understand spiritually what I have 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. I have commended unto you a certain mystery; spiritually understood, it will quicken. Although it is needful that this be visibly celebrated, yet it must be spiritually understood. https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/1801099.htm St. Augustine, Exposition of the Psalms, Psalms 99:8, NPNP, Second Series, Vol. 8, p. 485.

St. Augustine, Exposition of the Psalms, Psalm 34:1, 394-402 AD

1. Because there was there a sacrifice after the order of Aaron, and afterwards He of His Own Body and Blood appointed a sacrifice after the order of Melchizedek; He changed then His Countenance in the Priesthood, and sent away the kingdom of the Jews, and came to the Gentiles. What then is, He affected? He was full of affection. For what is so full of affection as the Mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ, who, seeing our infirmity, that He might deliver us from everlasting death, underwent temporal death with such great injury and contumely? And He drummed: because a drum is not made, except when a skin is extended on wood; and David drummed, to signify that Christ should be crucified. But, He drummed upon the doors of the city: what are the doors of the city, but our hearts which we had closed against Christ, who by the drum of His Cross has opened the hearts of mortal men? And was carried in His Own Hands: how carried in His Own Hands? Because when He commended His Own Body and Blood, He took into His Hands that which the faithful know; and in a manner carried Himself, when He said, This is My Body. Matthew 26:26. https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/1801034.htm, St. Augustine, Exposition of the Psalms, Psalm 34:1 also NPNF series, Second Series, vol. 8, Philip Schaff. Pp. 72-73. Psalm 34:1,

St, Augustine also speaks about this in his masterpiece, the City of God, 412-415 AD:

Here certainly we perceive that the Wisdom of God, that is, the Word co-eternal with the Father, has built Him a house, even a human body in the virgin womb, and has subjoined the Church to it as members to a head, has slain the martyrs as victims, has furnished a table with wine and bread, where appears also the priesthood after the order of Melchizedek, and has called the simple and the void of sense, because, as says the apostle, He has chosen the weak things of this world that He might confound the things which are mighty. 1 Corinthians 1:27 Yet to these weak ones she says what follows, Forsake simplicity, that you may live; and seek prudence, that you may have life. Proverbs 9:6 But to be made partakers of this table is itself to begin to have life. For when he says in another book, which is called Ecclesiastes, There is no good for a man, except that he should eat and drink, what can he be more credibly understood to say, than what belongs to the participation of this table which the Mediator of the New Testament Himself, the Priest after the order of Melchizedek, furnishes with His own body and blood? For that sacrifice has succeeded all the sacrifices of the Old Testament, which were slain as a shadow of that which was to come; wherefore also we recognize the voice in the 40th Psalm as that of the same Mediator speaking through prophesy, Sacrifice and offering You did not desire; but a body have You perfected for me. Because, instead of all these sacrifices and oblations, His body is offered, and is served up to the partakers of it. https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/120117.htm St. Augustine, City of God, Book 18, 20, NPNP, 1st Series, volume 2, p. 358.

St. Augustine, Sermon 227, 395 AD-430 AD

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. Through that bread and wine the Lord Christ willed to commend His Body and Blood, which He poured out for us unto the forgiveness of sins. Augustine, Sermon 227, Jurgens The Faith of the Early Fathers, volume 3, p. 30, 1517.

What you see is the bread and the chalice; that is what your own eyes report to you. But what your faith obliges you to accept is that the bread is the Body of Christ and the chalice the Blood of Christ. This has been said very briefly, which may perhaps be sufficien\t for faith, yet faith does desire instruction. . . . How is the bread His body? And the chalice, how is it His Blood? Those elements, brethren, are called Sacraments, because in them one thing is seen, but another is understood. What is seen is the corporeal species; but what is understood is the spiritual fruit. St., Augustine, Jurgens, ibid. Sermon 272 , p. 32, 1524.

After all, St. Augustine says what a sacrament is. ‘an outward and visible sign of an inward and invisible grace.’ It is an outward sign, of an invisible grace. Signs involve symbolism but can point to more than symbolism.

With numerous quotations on the real presence, I just give a sampling here. Protestant historians will note that St. Augustine has a rounded look at the Eucharist where he does not always speak of its true presence, but involves symbolism as well.

One could multiply texts like these which show Augustine taking for granted the traditional identification of the elements with the sacred body and blood. There can be no doubt that he shared the realism held by almost all his contemporaries and predecessors. It is true that his thought passes easily from Christ’s sacramental to his mystical body. It does so, first, because the consecrated bread and wine themselves, composed as they are of a multitude of once separated grains of wheat and grapes, are a manifest symbol of unity; and secondly, in a more profound sense, because the fact that the faithful participate in the eucharist is a sign of their membership of the Church. J. N. D. Kelly, p. 447.

[Augustine] at the same time holds fast the real presence of Christ in the Supper . . . He was also inclined, with the Oriental fathers, to ascribe a saving virtue to the consecrated elements. Philip Schaff, History of the Church, vol. 3, chapter 7)

This examination has shown that none of the Fathers that Kelly Powers pointed to, actually believed that the Eucharist was only a symbol. The Fathers and other Christian writers, yes would point to symbolism, but as noted by historians, symbolism to them pointed to the Eucharists reality. They would also point to the Eucharist as a sacrifice to God. The Eucharist was a means of grace that was necessary for salvation. None of them thought it was merely remembering what he did for us. This was a means of grace that helps to sanctify believers on the path for salvation.

Page created by: Matt1618.
Send email with questions or comments on this writing to Matt1618 matt16182@yahoo.com

Return to Eucharist Page

Do These Church Fathers and Other Church Figures Reject the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist?: A Response ...by Matt1618...... This text may be downloaded or printed out for private reading, but it may not be uploaded to another Internet site or published, electronically or otherwise, without express written permission from the author.