Dutch, I do not believe it helpful to “demonize” an entire communion, even if not everything they do is right. At least out of humility since the one where you are undoubtedly has other problems you can’t see, yet. (And the Lord knows this and is willing to tolerate some guff rather than destroy the yet-imperfect but still-useful organization.) I ask specific questions about specific issues and try not to just slap broad labels. That’s almost always a big discussion stopper.
I appreciate your concern, Red. This is not a matter of a legitimate communion having a few bumps and bruises. The underpinnings of the Roman Catholic Church are as far from the Gospel of Jesus Christ as the Judaizers were during the 1st century. Paul had harsher words for them than I have used and he wanted it clearly understood that a little bit of heresy was no small matter.
"That’s almost always a big discussion stopper."
I find no admonition to grant honor to "another gospel, which is really not another gospel." You may find a "discussion" useful, but discussions about venerating humans is not something I am interested in.
You might consider whether the inference gathered by a "discussion" is that you find the other view within the pale, but just needs tweaking. This is especially true when you may really believe the other view is entirely off the rails. I wish to leave no possible misunderstanding about where I believe the Scriptures stand.