"binding": DeMontforts writings and not "official" RC doctrine yet there are popes who make pilgramages to his grave. In other words an individual RC is perfectly free and quite encourged to believe every word written by DeMontfort through "inference". The more Marian RC's are encouraged so the less Marian ones have the "non binding" out. It has been stated that all RC's are one and non RC's are shattered and yet through this type of doctrinal inference the RC is able to build his own eclectic set of beliefs.
But I'd like to get back to one point: the Catholic Church does not teach that grace is earned. If Scripture is absolutely clear on two points, it is these: (1) That salvation is a free gift of God's grace which we cannot ever deserve or earn and (2) God will reward or punish us on the Day of Judgment according to our deeds.
Ok then let me ask this. What is the relationship between communion and grace? So far you are defining a whole different grace than the previous person I spoke to. I'm wondering how to go back a thousand posts and do a search on biblewonk and grace. Then I could show you what I learned. It sure sounds like a case of two different RC's on a different sheet of music, not that that is so bad, you will get very different views of predestination from my tiny church of about 40 families.
And thanks for not taking offense to every little thing I say. This mode of communication is extremely good at starting fights and that is not my intention.
I would remind you that DeMontfort was a person, not just a set of documents. St. Louis stood up to a lot of jaded skeptics and atheists who had far more power than he and he lived a life of great personal virtue and sacrifice at atime when decadence and neglect of spiritual values were fashionable. Although I agree with those who feel that his Mariology was extreme and excessive, I don't think he ever forgot who his Lord and Savior was.
In other words an individual RC is perfectly free and quite encourged to believe every word written by DeMontfort through "inference".
Catholics are, in point of fact, encouraged to have as balanced a view of doctrine as possible.
The more Marian RC's are encouraged so the less Marian ones have the "non binding" out.
A proper regard for Mary is encouraged. I say my Rosary. I attend Mass on the Feasts of the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption. I ask Mary to pray for me and my family every day. I don't think any Catholic can truly call themselves Catholic if they do not acknowledge the Lord's mother and her role in the history of salvation.
But no Catholic is encouraged to forget her subaltern status either. To forget that she is, in her own words, "the handmaid of the Lord" is unCatholic.
It has been stated that all RC's are one and non RC's are shattered
Catholics are one primarily through their shared participation in the Eucharist and their assent to a body of doctrine most authoritatively represented in the Catechism. In any matter outside the dogmatic boundaries of the Church's teaching, a variety of thinking is permitted. We do not split congregations over nonauthoritative points of doctrine.
and yet through this type of doctrinal inference the RC is able to build his own eclectic set of beliefs.
This is true to a certain extent. One example: Church teaching is clear that God created the world and that there was a first man and a first woman who sinned against Him. I personally believe in a literal six day creation and I disbelieve in evolution - perhaps the only person born and raised in New York City who holds this view. Other Catholics believe in "theistic evolution" and an allegorical interpretation of the creation account. But as long as we both believe that the world did not come from some random physical process and as long as we both believe that there really was a first man and woman who sinned, we are both within the acceptable range of teaching. Is my view "eclectic"? Perhaps. But it is orthodox.
Ok then let me ask this. What is the relationship between communion and grace?
Do you mean "communion" in the sense of "the communion of the saints" that we were discussing earlier, or do you mean "communion" in the sense of "partaking in the Eucharist (Lord's Supper)"?
With those, we lost the visual input of body language and facial expression to convey meaning, and on this silly computer we've lost the tone, volume and pacing of our speech patterns.
It's no wonder that we can get into a tiff or have our nose seemingly tweaked by others when they no more intended that than anything.