Dilucida explicatio sanae doctrinae de vera participatione carnis & sanguinis Christi in sacra coena, ad discutiendas Heshusii nebulas

He reproaches us for deferring more to reason than to the Word of God. What if we bring no reason except that taken from the Word of God and founded upon it? Let him show that we philosophize in divine mysteries in a profane manner, that we measure the heavenly kingdom with our own sense, that we subject the oracles of the Holy Spirit to the judgment of the flesh, that we do not admit anything except what smiles upon our own prudence. But the matter is far otherwise. For what is more repugnant to human reason than that souls, immortal by creation, should derive life from mortal flesh? This is what we bring. What is less consistent with earthly prudence than that the flesh of Christ should diffuse its life-giving power from heaven even to us? What is more alien to our sense than that corruptible and perishable bread should be an undoubted pledge of spiritual life? What is more removed from Philosophy than that the Son of God, who according to His human nature is in heaven, should so dwell in us that whatever was given to Him by the Father is common to us, and thus that the immortality with which His flesh was endowed is our own? All these things we clearly testify: whereas Heshusius urges nothing but the delusion of his own mind, that the flesh of Christ is eaten by the incredulous, and yet is not life-giving. But if he believes that there is no reason beyond Philosophy, let him learn from a short syllogism:

Whoever does not observe the analogy of the sign and the thing signified,
is an unclean animal, not dividing the hoof.
Whoever asserts that the bread is truly and properly the body of Christ,
overturns the analogy of the sign and the thing signified:
Therefore, whoever asserts that the bread is properly the body, is an
unclean animal, not dividing the hoof.

And from this syllogism let him know, even if there were no Philosophy in the world, that he is nonetheless impure.