I read the essay and it's the same weak arguments I've heard from every catholic on this topic. And not one of the statements is Scripturally sound.
To say that Psalms 45 points to Mary is indeed a stretch and more accurately, not even an accurate reading of the text.
The appeal that the "early church" was doing this is also dubious. We know, in spite of how many times catholics say it, that the ECFs were not in 100% agreement on Mary, the papacy, or most of the things modern day roman Catholicism espouses.
They can't even translate the passage in Luke when the angel greets Mary....He doesn't say "Hail full of grace"....for the umpteenth time the greek is translated as "Hail, you favored with grace." There is a huge difference between the two from a theological position. So from the very start the catholic position is not founded on a solid scriptural basis.
And then to compare Mary being some "new" Eve by analogy further deteriorates the catholic position. The pain of childbirth was a result of the sin of Eve. Mary experienced the pain of childbirth. She offered a sin offering after birth completely destroying the catholic position on the immaculate conception.
I just find it completely amazing that catholics are so entrenched in their "understanding" on this topic and can't see the forest for the trees.
You,Salvation and others seem like sincere nice people. I encourage you, and all catholics, to do your own research. Examine what you are being taught. Compare it with the Word. Get a greek interlinear and check the words for yourselves. Ditch the man-made stuff...stay with the Word.