“...Satan hates Mary more than anyone?? Really?...”
If you had read the rest of my post carefully, you would have noticed that I classified her as “creature”, as set apart from uncreated Jesus Christ the Son of God. Thus in the context of the comment one would see that “anyone” refers to “creatures”.
My words from post 127:
Satan hates Mary more than anyone. Maybe one reason is because her “Amen, so be it” (paraphrase with liberty) reply to the angel was sounded with the highest level of faith and obedience, higher than any creature ever before or since, in perfect contrast to Satan’s dispositions
For more good Catholic perspective on the topic (from Haydock) we read regarding Gen 3:15:
Ver. 15. She shall crush. Ipsa, the woman: so divers of the fathers read this place, conformably to the Latin: others read it ipsum, viz. the seed. The sense is the same: for it is by her seed, Jesus Christ, that the woman crushes the serpent’s head. (Challoner) -— The Hebrew text, as Bellarmine observes, is ambiguous: He mentions one copy which had ipsa instead of ipsum; and so it is even printed in the Hebrew interlineary edition, 1572, by Plantin, under the inspection of Boderianus. Whether the Jewish editions ought to have more weight with Christians, or whether all the other manuscripts conspire against this reading, let others inquire. The fathers who have cited the old Italic version, taken from the Septuagint agree with the Vulgate, which is followed by almost all the Latins; and hence we may argue with probability, that the Septuagint and the Hebrew formerly acknowledged ipsa, which now moves the indignation of Protestants so much, as if we intended by it to give any divine honour to the blessed Virgin Mary. We believe, however, with St. Epiphanius, that “it is no less criminal to vilify the holy Virgin, than to glorify her above measure.” We know that all the power of the mother of God is derived from the merits of her Son. We are no otherwise concerned about the retaining of ipsa, she, in this place, than in as much as we have yet no certain reason to suspect its being genuine. As some words have been corrected in the Vulgate since the Council of Trent by Pope Sixtus V. and others, by Pope Clement VIII. so, if, upon stricter search, it be found that it, and not she, is the true reading, we shall not hesitate to admit the correction: but we must wait in the mean time respectfully, till our superiors determine. (Haydock) Kemnitzius certainly advanced a step too far, when he said that all the ancient fathers read ipsum. Victor, Avitus, St. Augustine, St. Gregory, &c. mentioned in the Douay Bible, will convict him of falsehood. Christ crushed the serpent’s head by his death, suffering himself to be wounded in the heel. His blessed mother crushed him likewise, by her co-operation in the mystery of the Incarnation; and by rejecting, with horror, the very first suggestions of the enemy, to commit even the smallest sin. (St. Bernard, ser. 2, on Missus est.) “We crush,” says St. Gregory, Mor. 1. 38, “the serpent’s head, when we extirpate from our heart the beginnings of temptation, and then he lays snares for our heel, because he opposes the end of a good action with greater craft and power.” The serpent may hiss and threaten; he cannot hurt, if we resist him. (Haydock)
http://haydock1859.tripod.com/id329.html
But you're not the only Catholic to advance the notion Satan hates Mary more than anyone else.
Regarding. Gen 3:15...The catholic encyclopedia online notes the vulgate translation of Gen 3:15 cannot be defended critically. Yet Catholics continue to use this translation resulting in bad theology.
It should be noted that of all the major translations, only the Douay-Rheims translates Gen 3:15 as "...she shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel."
The catholic encyclopedia online, which bills itself as the most comprehensive resource on Catholic teaching, history, and information ever gathered in all of human history, has this to say about Gen 3:15 in relation to the immaculate conception.
No direct or categorical and stringent proof of the dogma can be brought forward from Scripture. But the first scriptural passage which contains the promise of the redemption, mentions also the Mother of the Redeemer. The sentence against the first parents was accompanied by the Earliest Gospel ( Proto-evangelium ), which put enmity between the serpent and the woman : "and I will put enmity between thee and the woman and her seed; she (he) shall crush thy head and thou shalt lie in wait for her (his) heel" ( Genesis 3:15 ). The translation "she" of the Vulgate is interpretative; it originated after the fourth century, and cannot be defended critically.
http://www.catholic.org/encyclopedia/view.php?id=6056
Roman catholicism's own "most comprehensive resource on Catholic teaching, history, and information ever gathered in all of human history" admits Gen 3:15 as translated in the Vulgate cannot be defended.
Yet catholics continue to do do and have even built one of their dogmas on a verse that cannot be defended!
You can't make it up....oh wait...they did in 1854.
I understand why roman catholicism would not be willing to admit the error. If it did, it would collapse the papacy and the rcc as so much has been vested in Mary.