Annotatio secunda Gregorii de Valentia societatis Iesu de controversia ubiquetaria

(...he treats of this objection of mine concerning Thesis 93), you will not find even a word by which he has undertaken to demonstrate, clearly and intelligibly, that we taught in that Thesis 93 (as he had accused) that the body of Christ cannot be visible in the heavens and invisible in other places at one time. Indeed, what is most foul for him, he did not even make any mention of this crime objected to him.

What, therefore, you will ask, is that which he does in this place? Namely, when he ought to have answered clearly to the crime objected to him, and could not do so, he dazzles the reader's eyes with I know not what inept loquacity; and having almost abandoned the case and the state of the accusation instituted by me against him regarding our Thesis 93—which was falsified by him—he undertakes to attack a certain part of that Thesis. From it, he silently wishes it to be gathered that we taught in that Thesis that the body of Christ cannot be visible and invisible, not only in one and the same place, but not even in different places. Yet this sentiment cannot, even in a dream, be imputed to our Thesis in any words. For in it, this alone is finally concluded: that he, if he is consistent with himself (that is, if he maintains that Christ is invisible and uncircumscribed in all places because of the union, and thus even in heaven, where he is also visible and circumscribed), must necessarily confess that the body of Christ is visible and invisible, circumscribed and uncircumscribed, etc., in one and the same place—namely, in heaven. Which, however, is absurd, nor can it happen in any way, as was posited by our people in the first part of the same Thesis. This is what he contends is not a consequence of his own Ubiquitarian sentiment, if in the first part of that Thesis we only said that the body of Christ cannot be simultaneously visible and invisible in one and the same place, just as our words clearly state.

Page 12 & 13

He proves this, however, by a miserable and clearly childish reason. "Come now," he says, "you proud and blasphemous Spaniard, cross swords with me, and do not wish to recoil, but oppose whatever weapons your condemned Society can supply you with. For you urge me: if in my doctrine..."