I lack the vocabulary to express the sliding scale from “blessed” to “worshipped”
Dulia, hyperdulia and latria. Dulia is the honour paid to Saints, hyperdulia the veneration offered only to the Blessed Virgin Mary, latria pertains to the worship of God. Dulia and hyperdulia are different in degree; dulia and latria are different in kind.
It is also a fact that this error is a widespread, if not dominant theme in certain parts of the RCC.
I disagree. Not that it doesn't exist, but it's not dominant in my experience and in my study. Many come to Jesus through His Mother. Non-catholics cannot conceive of this, for Catholics it is all part of the Communion of Saints - another important loss in Protestantism.
Again, non-Catholics can look at dulia and see it as something they can only conceive of as "worship" since they have no corollary.
parade of the Virgin of Guadelupe..
It needs to be remembered that the appearance of Our Lady of Guadalupe was an historical event of immense significance for the people of Mexico. The event is the reason for the celebration and the event was the appearance of the icon. It also symbolizes the Mexican nation since its independence. The celebration celebrates the appearance and their independence. This is primarily what it is about as opposed to, say, Easter.
the correct RC response is to not be defensive about this error, but to admit heretical groups are doing it and stamp them out.
Heresy, in this regard, is mistaking the Lord's Mother for the Lord, latria for dulia, the finite for the infinite. This heresy cannot often be seen from the outside - and can easily be mistaken, particularly by those who have little or no knowledge of the distinctions of worship.
For example, due to my own ignorance I may watch a fraternal rite of initiation and see all sorts of symbols and evidence of religious heresy where none exists. :)
Should heresy be corrected? Of course, as should magical thinking, which occurs in children and Christians of all stripes and ages.
For many non-Catholics a shrine to Mary is heresy. So again, there is a line to cross between dulia and latria, but one I find non-Catholics ill-equipped to distinguish. I agree with your basic point while I may disagree with where you see heresy. I tend to be defensive because others judge my spiritual practice and call it heresy apparently professing to know what is in my heart and mind.
Nothing personal at all intended, but we see Protestantism as heresy, so me telling you to "stamp out heresy"… well, in some key areas we disagree on what should be stamped out.
In summary of all this: Mary can be an object of idolatry, it is much less prevalent than what Protestants can and do see, idolatry is not a Catholic monopoly, but the Church should certainly be quick to point it out and stop it. [“all flesh is evil, total depravity” ] Not any Protestant Church I know about.
Calvinism, certain Reformed Churches and many Baptist Churches.
I understand what you are saying, but I’ve been among SW Hispanics my entire life in New Mexico.
On an oil rig, there was an accident, and I prayed for safety of the man (who was electricuted).
The rig hands (hispanic) were discussing it later, and told me (this is a near quote) “Oh, we don’t need to pray to Jesus, we have Mary. You have Jesus. We have Mary, and don’t need Jesus.”
It was shocking to me, and I’ve heard the near same dicussion with others.
Regarding heresy: technically, I am not a heretic to the RCC, as I’ve never been a member of a Protestant (break off) church. I’ve always just gone to informal churches that were “2 or more believers gathered in his name” (that’s all it takes), which formed from men who came to accept Christ as their savior. More of the great, unwashed, variety of Christian, than protestant.