## The Church seems to have a blind spot when it comes to any thing Marian - hardly anything qualifies as an abuse.
Even the title of “Mary, Virgin Priest” was allowed for a good while - as were statues of her in priestly vestments.
The trouble, is, IMO, that human ingenuity can justify anything, or almost anything: unless something is really blatant, like the idea that we receive the Body of Mary in the Eucharist, it seems to be tolerated. Otherwise, Mary can be given almost every title of Christ, except “Creator”. She’s even been called “Saviouress”, “Mediatrix”, “Co-Redemptrix”, “divine”, “omnipotent”. In an atmosphere of this sort, where the distinctions between the Divine Persons & Mary are rather hazy, it’s not surprising that the Mariavites came into being; or that Maximilian Kolbe came up with the horrible statement that “Mary is the quasi-incarnation of the Holy Spirit”. Which Father - let us ignore the Bible, and pretend it does not exist - ever said anything like
that ? It is downright blasphemy and heresy, utterly anti-Christian. It sounds like something said by one of the mediaeval dualist heresies.
See this thread:
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=28444 and search with the word
quasi
catholicculture.org/docs/doc_view.cfm?recnum=6547
"In other writings the Polish friar attempts to describe Mary’s deep, intimate union with the Third Person of the Trinity from her conception, by calling Mary the “quasi-incarnation” of the Holy Spirit.13 He is careful to stress that this union “is not of the same order as the hypostatic union linking the human and divine natures in Christ”;14 for he repeated often that the Holy Spirit does not dwell in Mary in the same way in which the Eternal Word is present in the sacred humanity of Jesus.15 The notion of the Holy Spirit becoming “in some manner” (
quasi) incarnate in Mary may at first seem to be an extreme idea. However, it is somewhat analogous to the statement by St. Louis de Montfort, that "God the Son wishes to form himself, and in a manner of speaking, become incarnate every day in his members through his dear Mother.“16 Along the same lines, St. Paul says: “It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me” (Gal. 2:20).”
Does this mean that Our Lord was quasi-incarnate in St. Paul ?
de Montfort is attributing to Mary that which is the work of the Holy Spirit. Defending one error by another is not convincing
With such ideas around, which have no basis on the NT, where the emphasis is on Christ, and not at all on his mother - whom St. Paul does not even name - it is no wonder that Mary has been treated as a sort of Gnostic entity, like Sophia the Divine Wisdom.
Thought about Mary seems to have a constant tendency to exaggeration, nonsense, and blasphemy.
It’s unastonishing that many Protestants are not very favourably impressed by the claims of the CC - to say the least, when they come across these things. ##
