The Elk advocate. [volume] (Ridgway, Elk Co., Pa.) 186?-1868, 1866-12-20
NUMBER SEW EN-.

eating the assistance of Mary, instead
of appealing to God Himself, seemed tC
me very strong argumnnt against it
lind my first remark was that it dishon
ors the character of Mary. In order tc
show that there is some advantage in
approaching God through her media
ton, you represent her full of mercy
but entirely wanting of justice. Con.
'cqueutly she wishes every sinner to be
forgiven, without any regard to the re.
quiremeuts Of justice. If this were so,
md She possessed such powers of inter.
cession as you ascribe to her, then she
would certainly ask that every man
should be saved, and her request would
be granted. Some OF our neighbors
who do not care to be religious in this
world, but wish some ground of hope for
the next; would feel very comfortable il
you could prove this to their satisfaction.
Yet | think they would not feel very
easy in view of Gods inhcxible Justice,
if they regarded their salvation as de
pending upon the intcrcesSiou of crca-
ture to whom "does not belong the attri-
butte of justice"
But Mary is no such woman. IF she
were, her intercession would be of very
little use and she would be miserable
creature, charging God with cruelty
Hhenocer His justice is honored in the
punishment of transgressors.
Second. Your argument reflects great
..jsnonor upon God. You represent
'iim as doing at the request Of Mary
what He would not do if lie acted in
accordance with His own attributes.
Aou say His Divine justice would of.
Ten require the punishment of the sin.
ner rather than his forgiveness but
when Mary intercedes justice is waived,
Tor "lle will refuse her nothing which
she asks Of Him" A good man would
do almost anything for a woman, where
there was no principle at stake. 4
rigkt'minded magistrate would pardon
any criminal at the request of virtu
Gus woman, if he could do it consistently
with his official oath. But if justice
requires the punishment of criminal
if he ought to suffer, and it would not
be right to pardon him-then we should
say that magistrate who should pardon
not belong the attribute of Justice
at the request ofa woman, (to whom does
who should yield justice at the request
Of one who had no regard for justice-we
should call such a man deficient in moral
rcctitude. But by your argument this
character is ascribed to the Judge Of all
the earth.
Again: We are informed, on the best
authority, that "G2d SO lcUcd tie World,
that lie gaze His onlg Jegottcn Son,
tint wHOsOEVER BELIEvETH IN HIM
shall not perish, Gut haze eccrlasting
Ne.' In view of this declaration it is
not dishonoring God in the highest de-
gree, to suppose that after all sinner
might be lost while believing in Jesus,
unless he should ask the mother of Jesus
to interccde for him! God has given
His Son to purchase Cur salvation, the
salvation of erery one that is lcWmy 10
be saUed, His word abounds with invi-
tations, eutreaties, commands, for all to
come, shall we dare to imagine He is
unwilling to forgive any that comply?
Third. In like manner your argument
greatly dishonors Christ. He is na0n
as we'll Gs God and by reason of his
human nature he is able TO "sympathize
with our inirmities," like any human
friend. lie was tempted in all points
like as we are, yet without sin" He
became a partaker of flesh and blood,
and though a Son learned obedience by
the things which he suffered; and this
was "that he might be merciful and
faithful High Priest, For in that he
himself hath suffered, being tempted,
ne is able to succor them that are temp
ted" Ind because We have such a
High Priest, able to sympathise with
our weakness, as well as to make salts
snction for our sins, the apostle exhorts,
Heb. 4, l6) "Let us therefore come
boldly to the throne Of grace, that we
may obtain mercy, and find grace to
help in time of need" You discourage
1his "boldness," or at least excuse the
want of it and direct the sinner to Ma
gy rather than her divine Son. But