Mr. ARNAƲD's seventh Consequence is, That the Doctrine of the * 1.1 Real Presence and Transubstantiation does not of it self lead a man to the dis∣coursing of Philosophical Consequences, nor upon explaining the difficulties of this Mystery; and therefore 'tis no marvel that the Fathers never took notice of 'em.
WE have already refuted this opposition, and it only remains that we observe here again Mr. Arnaud's illusion, who to answer the proof drawn from the Consequences which he calls Philosophical ones, such as are the existence of accidents without a subject, the existence of a body in divers places at once, the concomitance, &c. which were unknown to the ancient Church, as well as to the Schismatical Churches, supposes first that these Churches do firmly believe Transubstantiation, and concludes afterwards that our proof mus•• needs be invalid, seeing here are the Greeks, Armeni∣ans and Copticks, &c. who make no mention of these difficulties. So that by this means there are no Arguments which Mr. Arnaud cannot easily answer.
WE have likewise refuted particularly what he offers touching the ado∣ration of the Eucharist in his 9th. Chapter. And as to what he alledges in the 10th. touching the impossibility of the change which we maintain, we will treat thereof in this following Book.