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)"?
The latter. More comments on your post when I feel less guilty about not working. ;-)