A discussion of the popish doctrine of transubstantiation wherein the same is declared, by…A discussion of the popish doctrine of transubstantiation vvherein the same is declared, by…

For beside that in the one place Augustine saith nothing but this, that the Sacrament of Baptism, as well as that other of the Eucharist, is a true Sacrament even to those that use it otherwise then they ought: which is nothing at all to that for which here it is alleged. In ^dthe other place he saith nothing of the Eucharist, but what he saith also both of ^ethe Word of God, or the Law, and Baptism expressly in the same place; to wit, that even ^fholy and divine things hurt those that use them otherwise then they ought. Yea Hierome goeth further in the place alleged, and ⁴applieth what he speaketh not to the Sacraments only of the New Testament, but to the Sacrifices also (which were Sacraments too) of the old. For commenting on those words, ^hWherein do we pollute thee? ⁱWhen the Sacraments (saith he) are violated, he is violated whose Sacraments they are. And that is all he saith there. Now were not the ^kSacrifices and the Sacraments of the old Testament (as the l Paschal Lamb at least) Sacraments of Christ, yea ^*and of his body and blood too? If they were, as no doubt can be but they were, then by Hieromes Rule was Christ and his body and blood wronged in them, when any wrong was done to them, albeit it were not essentially or corporally present in them: nor doth such wrong therefore or guilt acquired by evil usage of the Eucharist imply any such corporal presence thereof in it.

For beside that in the one place Augustine saith nothing but this, that the Sacrament of Baptisme, as well as that other of the Eucharist, is a true Sacrament euen to those that vse it otherwise then they ought: which is nothing at all to that for which here it is alleadged. In