[De Scripturarum interprete adversus exercitatorem paradoxum libri duo; (Apud Johannem Ribbium, 1668)]
Ludwig Wolzogen (1633–1690), that learned and pious Doctor of sacred theology, was born in the city of Amersfoort within the bounds of the Dutch Republic, in the year of our Lord 1633. Descended from the illustrious house of Wolzogen, and son to the renowned Johann Ludwig von Wolzogen, he was early trained up in the fear of God and in the rudiments of good letters. Advancing in years, he was called by Providence to labor in the service of the Reformed Churches, and became a faithful minister and distinguished professor in the academies of the United Provinces. He first adorned the chair of philosophy and theology at the University of Groningen (1660–1663), where his doctrine was sound and his manner grave, ever striving to expound the oracles of God with purity and learned diligence. From thence he was summoned to Utrecht University (1664–1670), and lastly to the Athenaeum Illustre of Amsterdam (1670–1690), where he continued, until his decease, to contend earnestly for the faith once delivered to the saints. A man of singular prudence, gravity, and godly conversation, Wolzogen remained constant in the doctrine of the Reformed Church, opposing all innovations contrary to the truth of the Gospel. His labours in the service of Christ’s Church were many, and his legacy abideth among the sons of the prophets. He entered into his rest at Amsterdam, November 13, 1690, having finished his course in faith and hope.
Table of Contents:
<aside>
</aside>
Concerning the True Interpretation of the Scriptures: A Defense of the Reformed Methodists
Although when tumult has been raised, it is lawful for each man to take up arms for the defense of the Republic, nor does any more just fear seem to require that tumult be declared in a Christian empire than in these most difficult times, when the very citadel of religion, being besieged, is in peril—so that I have nothing to fear lest I incur the censure of some men, because I have undertaken to refute the most dangerous little book which that infamous Author recently published concerning the Philosophy of the Interpreter of Scripture—yet there is a certain particular reason of mine by which I have been chiefly induced to wish to write concerning this argument, although it is already occupied by the industry of many excellent men.
Not that there are lacking many other good reasons which I could bring forward here, both concerning my person, which is such to me, both in the Academy and in the Church, as imposed by my Lords, that nothing seems greatly alien from theological matters; and concerning the pious decree of the illustrious Orders of this Province, by which, while they proscribed the Paradoxical Writer, they sufficiently declared by their own example how all their subjects ought to be affected toward him.
But this especially, regarding me particularly, moved me: that our Church was so confidently noted by the published disputations that scarcely anyone doubted that that horrible monster had burst forth from its Synod. This, since it has no light opinion of detestable error, of which I cannot bear even the suspicion; and is of such a kind that our zeal would be argued to be set in opposition to the holy zeal of the Princes, from which my mind has always shrunk—I judged it necessary to strive with all my strength that, if it could be, the false rumor might be utterly extinguished.
For although he who was the chief author of spreading it, having been instructed by us, acknowledged his error, yet he did not remove all alienation; nor should he who satisfied us concerning himself by his candor be believed to have likewise satisfied concerning the rest, whom he drew very many into his opinion—unless perhaps by that commendable signification of will by which he indicated, not reluctantly, that he was prepared to wash away by a similar public writing the stain which he had unwittingly sprinkled upon us by public writing.
With this indeed we could have been content, if there were hope that the remedy would reach all those upon whom the pestilential breath of preconceived opinion had blown. Now, when we are prevented by some fate of human affairs from daring to promise this to ourselves, it remains that the Gallo-Belgian Church herself, as avenger of her own fame, should make it manifest by deed how contrary her doctrine is to this paradoxical opinion.
Nor indeed do we here undertake the defense of that Most Distinguished Man against whom the suspicion was deliberately cast; who is both sufficiently protected by his own innocence, and, when he needs to be defended, will not be defended by stronger arms than his own. But because through his side the very name of the Church was being attacked, I judged it to be especially my part to lend patronage to this.
Now the whole cause has been pleaded by us if we repel the accusation by mere denial alone. The paradoxical book is not ours, the opinion of the book is not ours. Let the exposed offspring seek a parent elsewhere—it has none here; let it seek a foster-father elsewhere—it will not find one here. We do not so believe, we do not so teach.
What can even calumny itself object here? We have as many witnesses of our doctrine as we have hearers: concerning our meaning, we ought to be believed speaking for ourselves. Yet we will grant this to suspicious men: that we may explicitly teach how far our own meaning is removed from the new paradox.
And, lest too long a speech be taken, I confess that the whole of this displeases me: Philosophy as the Interpreter of Scripture. Indeed, this is a question both noble in itself, if any other concerning the Interpreter of Scripture, and especially necessary. For it contains in itself all Christian religion, which certainly is nothing if it does not flow in a continuous channel led from the very fountain of the Scriptures; and it has by no means been sufficiently clearly expounded heretofore, so that he would seem to have accomplished the greatest work who has excited learned contentions concerning it.
Perhaps the glorious Exercitator may seize this palm by some right of his own, who, while he has indicated to others some malignant light caught as if through a crack, has cast zeal for dispelling the remaining night. But here stands nearly all his praise: for he himself seems to me, stunned by unaccustomed brightness, then to rage with blinded eyes and alienated mind; so he sees nothing, who follows reason as guide so unreasonably as interpreter of Scripture, and raves, who so impotently exults in it as if triumphing.