Ratio ineundae Concordiae inter Ecclesias reformatas, sive, quibus modis occurri possit mirificis artibus, quibus pontificii per quosdam imprudentes theologos universas Christi ecclesias potissimum autem et primum Germanicas pessundare conantur

explanation should be provided: and the same holds true for the judgment of the writings of other theologians. For once errors, if there are any, have been condemned, and what was stated obscurely in the writings of Luther and Calvin has been clearly declared, then the writings of both will be in high authority; they will be approved by all the pious, and will be read with the greatest fruit and without offense to anyone. And by this method, the Churches will enjoy certain and lasting peace. And certainly, it is most equitable that the opinions of men, and all controversies in the Christian religion, be tested and finished by the writings of the Prophets, Apostles, and Fathers: to which the writings of these theologians must be referred, and judged by them. As Luther himself determined regarding his own writings in many places.

For if Luther and Calvin were living today, and were willing to maintain and defend in a free general council a recurring theme in the sixteenth century: the call for a truly free, ecumenical council to resolve religious schism (which is so greatly sought by all) the opinions about which there is now controversy, would they not be laughed at and rejected by all as foolish and utterly insane, because they would dare to determine and decree regarding those things that pertain to the salvation of Christians from their own sense? This liberty or authority, if it were not conceded to Luther and Calvin while they were alive, why should it be permitted to them when dead? For neither ever arrogated this to himself. But it is manifest that the controversies in religion about which there is now contention are chiefly on account of the writings of Luther and Calvin: which are defended by the parties with such stubbornness that by certain ill-sane men they are preferred to the Prophetic and Apostolic [writings], with the greatest harm to the whole Republic, or are at least made equal to them.

III. Let manifest errors be condemned, as in this chapter, in this way. Whoever denies that the true body of Christ is truly eaten by all the pious and faithful in the sacred Supper, and his blood drunk, let him be anathema.

IIII. Let things necessary for salvation be separated from those not necessary. For it is certain that these very fierce contentions, concerning the mode of the sacramental presence and the manducation a technical term for the act of eating of the body of Christ in the sacred Supper (which, however, all confess to be inexplicable), are the origin and source