Your defense against the accusation that Catholics pray to and worship Mary seems to employ a nuanced usage of "prayer" and "worship" such that Catholics ARE praying and worshiping, but just not in the accused sense. Partial admission only leaves room for partial denial.
Folks who make up their own religion, though, like to start out by redefining terms to suit their own twisting of Scripture. Due to that fact they often can't understand a simple word like "prayer" because they've accepted the twisted definition their own personal religion finds useful in furthering their lies and their slanders of others.
Examples of redefined terms used in this thread would include "worship" and "veneration" and "imitate" such that veneration is a world away from worship whereas imitation is (according to the author of the cited article) IS veneration.
Likewise, such followers of false religions cannot meet and accept Christ because they refuse to accept Christ as He is and insist that their version of Christ conform to their own personal religion so they can go along to get along in a pagan society.
I didn't realize that Christ's own nature had become the issue. Are you about to admit that Catholic dogma is that salvation depends upon accepting a particular belief about Mary?
Are you about to admit that Catholic dogma is that salvation depends upon accepting a particular belief about Mary?Certainly the deliberate lies told by so many PROTESTants about Mary and her nature cannot be seen as anything but sinful.