[1000 silverlings]

And as for thinking that Mary does all the work of Christ -- It's not even worth trying....

Well if you go back and read that book that Quix posted it appears that she does

[Quix]

YUP.

INDEED.

IIRC, someone on our side—Dr E, I think—posted some quotes from the Catechism which affirmed similar outrages re Mary.

[Mad Dawg]

One time I went through a list of quotes of that kind and showed how each one, read without the intention to construe them as idolatrous, could be seen as consistent with monotheism and with all the normative doctrines of the atonement.

Another time I offered a conjecture about people vying for extravagance in praise and making witty expressions of devotion as if challenging their companions to say, "You can't say THAT!" and then coming up with some tendentious and outrageous explanation which pulled the extravagance back within the bounds of orthodoxy.

But it was when somebody else quoted somebody like deMontfort saying as clearly as could be that in every respect mary is secondary and derivative and blah blah, and the response from the other side was, in essence, "He's just saying that. He doesn't mean it."

That pretty much sealed the deal for me. When the words of an author are dismissed because they run counter to the accusation, when the evidence which disproves the charge is thrown out BECAUSE it disproves the charge, then there's no more point in arguing.

But there certainly are a lot of excessive statements about Mary from some Catholics.