“And the God of peace crush Satan under your feet speedily. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you.” (Romans 16:20)
“I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed: she shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel.” (Genesis 3:15)
......“I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed: she shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel.” (Genesis 3:15)......
This verse is speaking about Christ’s future victory over Satan. The He is a masculine single pronoun in Hebrew, meaning He does this Himself, and He does not share this victory with anyone else. The New Testament agrees with this.
In Rom.16:20 It states, “The God of peace will soon crush Satan”—” It was for this very reason that the Son of God appeared to destroy the devils work.” (1 Jn.3:8) That “by his death He might destroy him who had the power of death-that is the devil.”
She shall crush (the head of the serpent)?
No, that's not what the Hebrew and Greek texts say.
Putting it as a "she" will do the crushing, is a corruption of Scripture.
It's not what the Vulgate originally said either, (and those of the Vatican bloody well know it, and know that outsiders know they are in possession of early copies of Vulgate which put it in Latin as a masculine "he" just as the Greek and Hebrew texts represent the wording to be) as witnessed in modern times by the Nova Vulgata which corrected the copy error that had put "she" in place of where the Greek, Hebrew, and oldest Latin texts indicated unmistakeably "he"...although I'm still suspicious of the use of possibly neutral 'ipsum' in the Nova Vulgata rather than slightly different lettering which could more accurately carry the gender sense clearly present within Greek and Hebrew texts, rather than leave it at possibly neutral ipsum. Even still, neutral gender is NOT feminine gender, so Mary was either obviosly being considered when the change was made, or else it was just a simple copy error as apologists such as Jimmy Akin makes it out to be. Noting against Akin personally, for he's likely a reasonable enough guy, as near as I can tell, even though I don't buy into all which he himself subscribes to. At least he noted the 'copy error'. That's a start.
The Greek and Hebrew texts do not say that the serpent would crush/strike at the heel of one identified as "her" either, although the Hebrew wording used at the last portion of that verse can possibly be reasonably interpreted to be speaking of plural "heel", yet that heel had just been identified as a "his" heel -- absolutely not a "her" heel.
The seed of the woman was identified as "he", not a "she".
The seed of the woman was NOT identified as a plural "they" either, as the USCCB's own English language version erroneously translates it, I assume them doing so from standpoint of trying to split the difference and transport possibly plural identity of who's heel would be laid in wait for, struck, or bruised, to then apply that vagueness which can possibly be read into the closing portion of Genesis 3:15 (as that is read in Hebrew) to apply to the more middling portion regarding the enmity between the seed of the woman and that of the serpent; "...he shall crush(bruise) thy head" to make room for themselves to use the word "they" shall crush the serpents head --- in order that the older (and errant) Roman Catholic theology which put it as as a she (which YOU have just re-affirmed that according to RCC theology is "Mary" INSTEAD OF THE "HE" BEING JESUS who does the crushing of the serpents head) which error itself was much supported by the earlier copy error within copies of Vulgate.
What a tangled up MESS Roman Catholicism has made out of some things. Genesis 3:15, the old copy error (or else deliberate oh so slight change of a he, or else a neutral gender firmly to a "she" in order to concoct OT biblical support for Marionism).
I could just SPIT.
It (Roman Catholicism) is near-always so dang-blasted squirmy in it's apologetic, just trying to forensically establish what is that has occurred can be quite difficult to sort out. It's like--- that's part of the plan, the better to hold onto control of whatever narratives there are...
Then the excuses come, and the smokescreens, and the distractions away from some narrow point or another--- the better to blind themselves from the truth of the matters(?), along with blinding any and all others possibly to be mislead.
No --- it is not as you just represented it to be; the OT Scripture was not prophesying that "Mary" would be putting her own foot upon the serpents head.
Try investigating Greek & Hebrew texts, along with a side of Peshitta (Classical Syriac) then come back and show us where it is written other than in corrupted versions of Vulgate, Douay-Rheims and whichever translations follow the same error from corrupted Clementine Vulgate, that there would be a "she" who would crush/bruise the serpents head.
I'll be waiting (till doomsday).