RESPONSIO.

when he uttered these words, did not point to any Bread but to himself. Furthermore, if this very sentiment and interpretation of Selneccer is true, This is my body, that is, It is joined with this Bread sōmatikē parousia by bodily presence and is conjoined with my true and essential body, certainly this expression is figurative and tropical, which is named syndochē synecdoche. This is something which some of them, and especially Luther himself, having proposed the likeness of a vessel, ingenuously acknowledged. Furthermore, we do not deny that nothing at all stands in the way of the power and will of Christ, not even the devils themselves, and that where Christ wishes to be present, he can be present there: but the whole question between us is whether he wished and wishes to be so. That is, whether these words of Christ, this is my body, this is my blood, signify, I am present by a bodily, essential, substantial presence of my flesh and blood, in, under, and with this Bread and wine, as often as those signs are performed for you by the pastor in the celebration of the Supper. This zētoumenon thing sought/questioned they assume as if it were hōmologoumenon something agreed upon; we deny it. For by this interpretation, we assert that the words and mind of Christ are perverted, and we demonstrate from the Word of God that the nature of sacramental expression permits this not at all. Therefore, they to en archē aiteisthai beg the question, as they say in the schools. Those who do this do not prove anything: but they admit fraud and a most base paralogismum logical fallacy in disputing (if they will listen to anything about philosophy, however unwillingly).