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