Pardon the wall of text, and I hope not to cause offense to anyone. I'm not Catholic, I'm Anglican, and myself unsure of what to do about that fact. The grass is not greener here, just as I'm aware of your brown patches too, nevertheless, I just disagree with your thoughts about Mass, Salvation, and Saints, so here's the point by point breakdown;
I see where you're coming from, the Vatican the institution is one of the major reasons I'm not Catholic
Say what you want, but liturgy is important. As someone brought up Anglican, it is "quires and where they sing" which makes the deal for me. I even go to Catholic mass if the liturgy will be sung in Latin. One should rejoice, and that is what the liturgy is, a rejoicing down the ages.
Ugh, please refrain from saying that like that, I really mean it. We have theories of atonement, but nothing so mechanical as a system of salvation.
Well, that's why I don't think Matthew 16:18 refers to anything other than the rock of Peter's revelation. One must also have regard for the fact that earthly thrones are incompatible with Christ's Kingdom when interpreting that verse (another reason I'm not Catholic).
I've met many Catholics, mostly laity and some clergy. Many are quite spiritual, but there's a whole other bunch who I've have had sour relations with. I understand where you're coming from, because we all hear about pedo priests, and the Vatican's first instinct was to cover it up, and only lately has their tune changed (another instance of the gates of hell prevailing).
Are good. Perhaps some Catholics take it too far, and as an Anglican, I've never been big into Saints, but these are people who deserve some recognition for their deeds. We can quibble all day about how much is appropriate to venerate these heroes of faith, and just who should be included, but I think we all know the key ones. This is really too personal to make a general rule in my book.
Attached: Rasing of Lazarus.jpg (424x516, 48.6K)