Meant to ping ya’ll tot he paragraph and Mad Dawg’s answer, if he reads it.
I “get”it just as I get it when Louis de Montfort (whom I personally call, “crazy Louie”) talks about “worshiping” Mary. My edition has a footnote hastily clarifying that language.
My fury comes from the interference with the apologetical task. I might say to my wife, “I adore you.” I might use other excessive language. But I would be prepared to clarify the difference between exuberant and poetic language and technically precise language.
If this were theological language I would condemn it. If you like, I will try to express what is wrong and what is (barely) tolerable about it.
Here (since I'm at chapter meeting, I can't spend time on this) I'd like to say that if you look at most of the prayers of consecration, they are not at all in the form of conjuring or commanding God. They are ... in the over all context and form an extended blessing of the Hebrew Form; but in language they are principally a plea.
So the language in the quote can only be redeemed if it is understood as similar to the confidence of a very young child who might say,”Wow! Looka that! When I call mom, she comes, every time!