Swabians, Saxons, and Hessians have not stated this quarrel in one shared way
So it is plain how tangled others have made the state of this quarrel, and how Lutherans have not always posed it one way.
The Swabians — Brenz, Schmidlin, and the rest who led first — wanted the divine properties poured into the human nature by the union's force, already in the womb.
The Saxons wanted communion of the divine properties of omnipotence, omnipresence, and the like in the assumed flesh, by the exaltation and the session at the right hand.
The Hessians looked more careful than the others in their Judgment on the Book of Concord (1576). Hospinian, Ursinus Wendelinus, Massonius (Anat. Germ. Part II), and others treat this at length.
Latin
UNDE patet, quam involutus fuerit ab aliis Status Controversiae, nec uno semper propositus modo a Lutheranis. Suevi enim, Brentius, Schmidlinus, &c. primi autores, effusionem voluerunt Proprietatum Divinar. in Humanam, vi Unionis, jam in Utero: Saxones Communionem Proprietatum Divinarum Omnipot. Omnipraes. &c. in assumpta Carne, vi Exaltationis & Sessionis a Dextris: Hassi, cautiores reliquis visi in Judicio suo de Libro Concordiae, A. 1576. Quae vide sis fuse apud Hospinianum, Ursinum Wendelinum, Massonium Anat. Germ. P. II. &c.