Fathers

A Candid Inquiry into the Controversies among Evangelicals · §73

The first falsehood was bodily presence in the Supper, and from it the flight to ubiquity

Click or tap any sentence to jump there. The side buttons skip a paragraph.

The first falsehood of them all was asserting a bodily presence in the Holy Supper.

From that they finally fled to this sacred anchor: that omnipresence — or ubiquity — and omnipotence too, and the rest, had been really communicated to the human nature, whether by outpouring, as the Swabians say, or by a kind of περιχώρησις / emmeation, as Chemnitz the Brunswick theologian and others say.

The wiser Hessians, Helmstedt men, Anhaltines, and the rest wanted to ground bodily presence not in the personal union or in ubiquity, but in the institution words: This is my body.

Add the places the Swabians and Saxons twist — Matthew 28:18; Philippians 2:9; Colossians 2:3, 9, and so on — and the rest of what the Palatine, Anhaltine, and Cassel theologians have defended at length.

Latin

Omnium vero primum ψεῦδος fuit, asserenda Praesentia Corporalis in S. Coena; Unde tandem ad sacram hanc anchoram perfugium, de Communicata realiter Nat. Humanae Omnipraesentia, seu Ubiquitate, ut & Omnipotentia, &c. seu per effusionem, ut Suevi, seu per quandam περιχώρησιν Emmeationem, ut Chemnitius Brunswicensis Theologus, &c. Prudentioribus Hassis, Helmstadiensibus, Anhaltinis, aliisque, qui praesentiam Corporalem fundare voluerunt non in Unione Personali, aut Ubiquitate, sed in Verbis Institut. Hoc est Corpus meum. Adde torquenda a Suevis & Saxonibus loca, Matth. XXVIII. 18. Phil. II. 9. Col. II. 3. 9. &c. & quae alia sunt prolixe a Theologis Palatinis, Anhaltinis, Cassellanis, &c. vindicata.

About this text

Samuel Strimesius — Prefatio through Controversiae Post Lutherum Controv. III-XIII + XV Tolerantia, Hexades Annotationum Prooemium and Annotatio I through Decem Theses / Francus plus Annotatio II §.I-§.VI and Annotatio III §.I–§.VII (through Cassellanum 1661) from Ingenua in Controversias Evangelicorum (Frankfurt an der Oder, 1708). Honest partial; Prefatio silence reasons, Annotatio III §.VIII+ fruits / §.IX+, Hexades theses body, deeper Controversiae / Part II remain.

English follows the locked 1708 Francofurti ad Viadrum Latin of Prefatio §I–II, Crimina defenses through III, Part I Protheoria through Controversiae Obices/Historia/Varii gradus, Formula Discord/Disparitas, Ulterius confirmatur / Classes / Formula protest / triplex differentia, Coena Domini Controversiae Priores through Precariae Hypotheses (Controv. print pp. 34–40), Controversiae Post Lutherum Natae Controv. III–XV tip (providence through De Tolerantia mutua; Controv. print pp. 40–78), Hexades Annotationum Prooemium H.I–§.III (Hexades print pp. 1–4 / PDF ~182–185), and Annotatio I De Augustana Confessione §.I–§.VIII tip (Hexades print pp. 5–24+ / PDF ~186–205+), reconstructed from Google Books PDF page images (ONB copy, id 3epYAAAAcAAJ) with pdftotext as check. No modern English was copied. Sister Halle digitization of Ingenua in Arminianismum (DOI 10.25673/65287) remains Anubis-blocked — skipped; Controversias only. Prefatio silence reasons, Annotatio I §.IX+, Hexades theses body beyond §.VIII, and remainder of Controversiae / folio remain.

Witnesses

This is an AI-assisted study translation. Source fidelity and completeness have not been independently certified. Open Latin on each section (or the Latin source witness link) for the source text. This is not a complete critical edition.