So of course I agree both that the Trinity is not extra Biblical AND that it is WAY more apparent in Scripture than our Marian stuff. But in addition to the "theme question" of Why is Jesus not enough (and when did you stop beating YOUR wife? — who says He's not enough for us? That is your conjecture about the motivation for Marian devotion, but it is merely a conjecture, and I think it's a mistaken one) you mentioned all the, so to speak "time and effort" in the Marian stuff.
So what I was clumsily saying was we spent right much time and effort on Trinitarian doctrine back in the first Millennium. It was the time and effort I was addressing. If you're going to bring up peripheral arguments to make your point, surely it's legitimate for me to address them.
, only bringing up peripheral arguments to detract from the issue:
That would be mind-reading. As Old Reggie will tell you, I am a cry baby, so when somebody raises peripheral arguments and then accuses the person who addresses the issues he raised of intending to distract, I get all whiny. Why bring up all the time and effort if they are not important. And if they ARE important, why cavil when I address them (however clumsily)?
Little stuff:
No one’s salvation depends on Mary or any other earthly priest. (We don't think Mary is an earthly priest or even a heavenly priest — except in the sense that all the elect are "priests and kings" — except for those of the female persuasion who would presumably be queens.) And We agree with this statement.
He declared “It is finished!” (or “It is paid in full!” ...),/i>
If you ever inflict our NAB on yourself, you will understand why I've been toying with "Okay, that's a wrap" for τετελεσται.
Okay, now here's the part where I fail miserably. As you may recall, I think (and JP2 had the good sense to agree with me) that Col 1:24 casts important light on what "enough" means, or, to say it another way, on what we are saved TO.
We are saved into Christ. We share in his work, and we share in His sufferings. Between now and the end, we are called to share in the happiness of Christ on the cross.
Today we papists commemorate Charles Lwanga and the other martyrs (some of them Anglicans!) of Uganda. We consider them happy and blessed because they died for Christ and His Gospel.
Paul daringly suggests that there is something yet to be fulfilled in the sufferings of Christ. I would rephrase to say that the benefits pouring from the Cross and from His wounder side are precisely that we are ennobled so far beyond our imagining that we can share in his redemptive work.
Oh! New analogy: Christ and His work are like a powerful tug boat, and we are like small dinghies towed by Him, and going where He goes.
We are promised not only houses and families to replace those we renounce, but the accompaniment of persecutions. "Provided you suffer with him" says St. Paul. And out of His overflowing sufficiency — "enoughness" — we are swept into saving work.
And that overflowing sufficiency also relates to Marian stuff. Remember the watchword is "shaken down, pressed together, running over. As I have said, these phrases hit me in a big way when I was feeding my sheep and when, to minimize the number of buckets I used to carry feed for 200 sheep and lambs, I tread to get as much feed as I possibly could into each bucket.
Ask and you shall receive — as much as possible! And God's "as much as possible" is very much.
I think that some bring to the party the presupposition that singing the Salve Regina or praying a Rosary is laborious. Well, I guess it is at first. But I think our romantic and sexual urges may have led us to forget how laborious the first days (years) of dating were. Even a wedding take a lot of work. But we don't think (do we?) that when dating was less terrifying and overwhelming and once the wedding is over and we are struck far out from the coast into the deep sea of marriage ... we don't think either that the dating or the wedding preparations EARNED us the marriage, and most of us don't resent (well not too much) all the work of the early years of dating and the rushing around in a controlled panic before the wedding.
Similarly, I ENJOY my Rosary-praying. The "work" side of it is pretty much forgotten in the communion, not with our Lady, but with our Lord which I experience in the Rosary.
(And that's a little important: It's not a theory for me that Mary leads me to Jesus, it's an experience, a report.)
To recap, I am suggesting that "enough" is not a kind of fixed quantity but more like the water of John 4:14 which becomes an inner spring.
And out of the rich plenty of that supply, from the far more than sufficient graces of Christ come Marian devotion. It is not to make up a lack. It is more like a dressmaker discovering that she has far more material than she thought she had, so she adds ruffles and bows and a train and all the rest to a wedding dress which, as planned, was already sufficient for decency and even a kind of spare beauty.
Again, as I hope you know, I am not trying to persuade you. I am trying to report on the view from here.
Thanks for a very sane, thoughtful reply. I depart from your line of reasoning regarding having “overflow” or “more material than planned”. Christ IS more than enough but He shares not His glory with anyone. This is where your wedding dress metaphor breaks down, IMO. Adding ruffles and bows brings additional elements (Mary, I presume) to the gown (Christ) to share in the wedding and all the attention, etc. given the bride and her gown. Christ shares such with nobody. He alone is worthy of adoration. Adding to Him reduces His visibility, obscuring Him with lesser elements.
"Extravagant language can be misunderstood; the more words iused, the greater the possibility of error. OTOH, If the writer wants to obfuscate a meaning, what better way than to bury it in wordiness?"