Dialogus de unione personali duarum in Christo naturarum secundum mentem Sacrae Scripturae, Ecclesiae, atque Augustanae Confessionis adversus eos qui genuinam horum sententiam pervertunt

you say some properties are communicable, such as Omnipotence, Omnipresence, and Omniscience, and others incommunicable, such as existing from eternity; since this discourse fights with itself and destroys itself, that something is called a property which nonetheless becomes common. Furthermore, you cannot exclude from eternity being Omnipotent or Omnipresent, which are the essence of God; which likewise belongs to the Deity and pertains to existence, unless you say Christ is God, but not eternal, nor existing in Himself.

Moreover, if you only say that divine properties are communicated to the human nature, and not conversely, it is either superfluous, or treacherous, or a matter of bad conscience, and it is done only for form (as is usually said) and for appearance, so that you might pretend to retain the old definition of the communicatio idiomatum, so that, namely, you are not discovered to be removing it, which would be too open a violence. Otherwise, you could dispatch these things in two words by saying: The communication is that by which the divine nature communicates its own properties to the human, really. But because you do not dare to openly invent new things at the first glance, therefore with these twin appendices or limitations, you overturn the former things, and you cover and color your rashness with a certain cataract original: "glaucomate" — a metaphor for blindness caused by cataracts, implying obfuscation of the truth..

And even if you attribute to yourselves the ability to retain and approve the old definition, when in the concrete you predicate divinity of man, and passion of God (and indeed rightly), yet the later conditions added to the definition immediately remove and overturn the same, by which, namely, you presume that divine properties in the abstract must be predicated of the human nature. For you openly ascribe divine properties to the human nature in the abstract and say it is omnipotent and omnipresent. By that very fact, you admit that you show yourselves to be held by no discernment or restraint regarding abstract or concrete terms, properties, or phrasing. Since this is new and rash, and is an open confusion of natures, therefore this real communication of yours will also be unable to stand.

ERIST.