Scripture Imagery: 78. The Intercession of Moses

 •  5 min. read  •  grade level: 10
 
We are apt to suppose that the position of a ruler is easy and enviable. And so doubtless it would be, if one could accept its privileges without feeling its responsibilities, like an oriental Pacha. Generally those who covet such positions would feel but little of the obligations, and therefore they are unfit; and the obverse of this is true too. There is nothing that we know of Moses to indicate that he ever had the slightest personal ambition to rule Israel: but when he was forced into the post, there is much to show that he felt the responsibilities of a ruler as only such a large and noble nature could. The heartless ingratitude and wickedness of the people however are almost too much for him; and it appears as if he would gladly relinquish his post till he hears God threatening to destroy them. Then, when he sees them in sin and danger, he offers himself up altogether—even to the eternal obliteration of his existence—sooner than desert them; as King Codrus gave his noble life up in secret for the Athenians; as Mettus Curtius leaped his horse into the gulf of everlasting oblivion for the Romans: so surpassed he the legends of Greece and Rome. This is one of the phases of the mediator. He is the Man of opportunity, the Friend in need, that loveth at all times, that sticketh closer than a brother—that says, Call upon Me when you are in trouble.
Those who saw him down amongst the people denouncing their idolatry with flaming words of consuming wrath, could have had no conception of the infinite pity with which he had just pleaded their cause—and would again plead it—even to the offering up of himself in propitiation for them. If Zobeide, in the Eastern story, seemed to beat her weeping dogs cruelly, it was because she was compelled: she afterward mingled her tears of sorrow with theirs. “Let the righteous smite me: it shall be a kindness!” The man of the world condones our faults to our faces and condemns them—perhaps exaggerates them—behind our backs. But the true Advocate reverses this: to men's faces He said “Ye generation of vipers “; but to God He groaned “Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do"!
Some have asked, What is the use of intercession with Deity? If God's disposition be merciful, what need is there that anyone should intercede for others? Is He likely to be swayed from His irrevocable decrees and inexorable purposes by any petitions whatsoever? This is a kind of reasoning most quickly answered by type or illustration. Here the great indignation of God with Israel for their gross insult and national treason is entirely natural. But so is the pleading of Moses for mercy to his sinful brethren. So also is the mercy that is at last granted in response to that impassioned intercession. It is quite natural, then, that a ruler should desire to grant mercy to a sinful people, and yet find it out of accord with the dignity of his throne and laws to do so unless some one pleaded their cause—quite natural, for instance, that Edward III. should have desired to spare Eustace St. Pierre and his companions, when they were led to him with the halters round their necks, but that he should have found it impossible to do so, until the queen urgently interceded for them. To spare them before that would have seemed weakness: after that it was grace. Yet it is easy to believe that the monarch was quite as benevolently disposed as his wife. He might even have suggested the intercession to her himself (though I do not believe he did, yet it would have been entirely natural). For all that, it is certain that without the intercession the men would have been hanged by the neck outside the walls of Calais till they were dead.
Not only so but cases are found where the ruler himself searches directly or indirectly for an advocate of sufficient importance for this very purpose; much as the Scotch government (theoretically) appoints the first law-officer of the Crown to defend a criminal who is not otherwise supplied with an advocate, in order that everything which can possibly be alleged in favor of the accused to justify him or mitigate the severity of the punishment should be advanced. And if punishment must come, it will then appear the more impartial and deliberate. Thus the advocate brings out either the vindication of the judged or of the judge, or both. In fact advocacy is one of the very few things that are always productive of some good results (and consequently it is but natural that shallow minds should think it useless).
Besides all this there is its reflex effect. No one can pray or intercede for another without receiving the answer in his own bosom, without becoming larger and stronger in soul (speaking now of ourselves). Let me put this question to the reader: Is your habit of mind that of intercession? Is it your tendency to condone, with that charity that covereth a multitude of sins, the offenses of others—so far as justice permits—and to appeal to God and man in their favor? If so, that is Christ-like. Or is it the reverse? The name of the middle ages, “Advocatus Diaboli", was well invented; but the function is a very old one, and a very bad one. Better to be an Advocatus Dei.
The Daysman, for whom Job in the ancient darkness groaned, has three principal functions: He is the Interpreter, whence the name “Word,” because He expresses the thoughts of God—and of man too. He is the mediator between God and man—that being broad and universal. Besides this, in the divine family of those whom He is not ashamed to call His brethren, He is the “Advocate with the Father”.