[blue-duncan]

“If however, you now admit that what we have here is difference of interpretation, then that is exactly what I ask, a retraction. So you understand now that the Catholic mariology and and hagiology are consistent with the Catholic understanding of the Holy Scripture?”

I don't see the need for a retraction since I never said your understanding was not consistent with the Roman Catholic interpretation of the scriptures. As far as the scriptures I quoted and the interpretation of them as being “fantastic interpretation of the scripture” please show by the scriptures where the interpretation is “fantastic”? Comparing scripture with scripture, the interpretation seems clear.

Paul in Gal. 4:4 does not even mention Mary by name or venerate her but simply says, “But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law”.

[annalex]

I never said your understanding was not consistent with the Roman Catholic interpretation of the scriptures.

Ah, OK. This is important to understand: the Catholic practices and the Scripture are not in contradiction. The Catholic practices and the scriptural interpretations of some religious communities, yours apparently among them, are.

the interpretation is “fantastic”?

The idea that Mary and the saints are robots incapable of cooperation with grace is fantastic, for example, and it ignores the scripture that shows her very much as a God-loving, God-fearing, rational, compassionate person, and not a zombified victim of some spiritual rape. There are many others on other topics.