The perpetuity of the faith of the Catholic Church on the Eucharist
Subtitle: With the refutation of the reply of a Calvinistic minister.
Publisher: John Coyne
Published: 1835
Place of publication: Dublin, Ireland
Language: eng
Table of contents: title: CONTENTS.; title: 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.; title: SECTION THE FIRST.; title: That this innovation is absolutely impossible 3; title: SECTION THE SECOND.; title: Refutation of the Fabulous History of this pretended innovation 33; title: REFUTATION OF THE REPLY OF A MINISTER TO THE FOREGOING TREATISE.; title: FIRST PART.; title: Containing a general solution of the objections against the Eucharist, which the Minister has collected together in his Reply 79; title: PART THE SECOND.; title: 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; title: 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; title: 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; title: Chap. IV. — Examination of the other Suppositions of the Author of the Reply  200; title: Chap. V. — Examination of what the Author of the Reply states upon the Adoration of the Sacrament 209; title: Chap. VI. — Examination of the Author's Fourth Reflection 227; title: 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; title: PART THIRD.; title: Chap. I.— Several examples of the bad Reasoning of the Author of the Reply in the Third Part of his Treatise 245; title: Chap. II. — Other examples of the bad Reasoning of the Author of the Reply 255; title: Chap. III. — Examination of what the Aether of the Reply says concerning John Scotus Erigena 275; title: Chap. IV. — Examination of what the Author of the Reply says concerning the Conventicle of the Iconoclasts, and the Second Council of Nice 284; title: Chap. V. — In which it is proved that the Author of the Reply cannot derive any support from the work of Bertram 306; title: 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; title: 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; title: 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