<div class="description">
<dl><dd>CONTENTS.</dd></dl><p>A Treatise upon the Eucharist; in which the Perpetuity of the Faith of the Church upon this Mystery is proved, by showing that no innovation has been made in her Doctrine concerning it since the Apostolic age. 
SECTION THE FIRST. 
That this innovation is absolutely impossible 3 
SECTION THE SECOND. 
Refutation of the Fabulous History of this pretended innovation 33 
REFUTATION OF THE REPLY OF A MINISTER TO THE FOREGOING TREATISE. 
FIRST PART. 
Containing a general solution of the objections against the Eucharist, which the Minister has collected together in his Reply 79 
PART THE SECOND. 
Chap. I. — Fundamental Reflection of the Author of the Reply — that the Christians, in former ages, had not a distinct belief, either of the Real Presence, or of the Real Absence 137 
Chap. II. — The Fundamental Reflection of the Author of the Reply Refuted, by showing the supposition to be inadmissible — that during the first ages of the Church, the Faithful had only a confused belief of the mystery of the Eucharist 142 
Chap. III. — It is impossible that the Faithful could have understood in a figurative sense those expressions of the Fathers which denote a Real Presence 165 
Chap. IV. — Examination of the other Suppositions of the Author of the Reply  200 
Chap. V. — Examination of what the Author of the Reply states upon the Adoration of the Sacrament 209 
Chap. VI. — Examination of the Author's Fourth Reflection 227 
Chap. VII.— That of the various innovations which the Author of the Reply states to have been insensibly established, there is not one that bears the least resemblance to the innovation, which, according to him, occurred upon the Eucharist 239 
PART THIRD. 
Chap. I.— Several examples of the bad Reasoning of the Author of the Reply in the Third Part of his Treatise 245 
Chap. II. — Other examples of the bad Reasoning of the Author of the Reply 255 
Chap. III. — Examination of what the Aether of the Reply says concerning John Scotus Erigena 275 
Chap. IV. — Examination of what the Author of the Reply says concerning the Conventicle of the Iconoclasts, and the Second Council of Nice 284 
Chap. V. — In which it is proved that the Author of the Reply cannot derive any support from the work of Bertram 306 
Chap. VI. — In which the reproaches of the Ministers against the Tenth Century are proved to be unjust, from an examination of the State of the Church, during that Century, in Germany and in the North 318 
Chap. VII. — In which it is proved, from a Review of the Churches of England, France, Spain, and Italy, during the Tenth Century, that the charges made against that Century are unfounded, as far as relates to these Churches 368 
Chap. VIII.— That the several sects which are separated from the Roman Church, and particularly that the Greek Schismatics agree with the Church of Rome in the belief of Transubstantiation 413 
Digitized by Google.
</p>
<dl><dd>Translated from the French of Pierre Nicole and Antoine Arnauld by P.J. Carew and William Kelly</dd>
<dd>Electronic reproduction</dd>
<dd>Master and use copy. Digital master created according to Benchmark for Faithful Digital Reproductions of Monographs and Serials, Version 1. Digital Library Federation, December 2002</dd>
<dd>digitized</dd>
<dd>Description based on print version record</dd></dl><br>Subjects: Lord's Supper -- Catholic Church; Claude, Jean, 1619-1687; Lord's Supper</div>
<div class="fn value">
<dl><dd>Nicole, Pierre, 1625-1695</dd>
<dd>Arnauld, Antoine, 1612-1694, author</dd></dl></div>
Internet Archive identifier