I would next refer to a writer who lived four centuries before Biel, but whose works received the papal sanction so late as the commencement of the seventeenth century, Petrus Damianus, Cardinal and Bishop.  His works were published at the command of Pope Clement VIII., who died A.D. 1604, and were dedicated to his successor, Paul V., who gave the copyright for fifteen years to the Editor, Constantine Cajetan, A.D. 1606.  I will quote only one passage from this author.  It is found in his sermon on the nativity of the Virgin, whom he thus addresses:  “Nothing is impossible with thee, with whom it is possible to restore those in despair to the hope of blessedness.  For how could that authority, which derived its flesh from thy flesh, oppose thy power?  For thou approachest before that golden altar of human reconciliation not only asking, but commanding; a mistress, not a handmaid.” [Accedis enim ante illud aureum humanae reconciliationis altare, non solum rogans, sed imperans; Domina, non ancilla.  Paris, 1743. vol. ii. p. 107.  Serm. 44.]

I must now solicit your attention to the sentiments of two writers, whose partial identity of name has naturally led, in some instances, to the one being mistaken for the other, Bernardinus de Bustis, and Bernardinus Senensis.  Bernardinus de Bustis, [Fabricius, vol. i. 215.] in the country of Milan, was the celebrated author of the “Office of the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin,” which was confirmed by the bull of Sixtus the Fourth, and has since been celebrated on the 8th of December.

He composed different works in honour of the Virgin, {373} to one of which he gave the title “Mariale.”  In this work, with a great variety of sentiments of a similar tendency, he thus expresses himself:—­

“Of so great authority in the heavenly palace is that empress, that, omitting all other intermediate saints, we may appeal to her from every grievance....  With confidence, then, let every one appeal to her, whether he be aggrieved by the devil, or by any tyrant, or by his own body, or by divine justice;” [Cologne, 1607.  Part iii.  Serm. ii. p. 176.] and then, having specified and illustrated the three other sources of grievance, he thus proceeds:  “In the fourth place, he may APPEAL TO HER, if any one feels himself AGGRIEVED BY THE JUSTICE OF GOD [Licet ad ipsam appellare, si quis a Dei justitia se gravari sentit.] ...  That empress, therefore, Hester, was a figure of this empress of the heavens, with whom God divided his kingdom.  For, whereas God has justice and mercy, He retained justice to himself to be exercised in this world, and granted mercy to his mother; and thus, if any one feels himself to be aggrieved in the court of God’s justice, let him appeal to the court of mercy of his mother.” [Ideo si quis sentit se gravari in foro justitiae Dei, appellet ad forum misericordiae matris ejus.]

For one moment, let us calmly weigh the import of these words:—­Is it any thing short of robbing the Eternal Father of the brightest jewel in his crown, and sharing his glory with another?  Is it not encouraging us to turn our eyes from the God of mercy as a stern and ruthless judge, and habitually to fix them upon Mary as the dispenser of all we want for the comfort and happiness of our souls?