There's no such thing as "Mary worship". If you're referring to the practice of human beings honoring the Mother of Jesus, that goes back to Luke 1:42
"And she cried out with a loud voice, and said: Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb. "
The infallibility of the Pope is not a 19th century invention. The Church always believed, in unity, that the Magisterium is infallible. Infallibilty had to be DEFINED because of the scourge of Protestantism and the trail of souls they drew away from the body of Christ by asserting that the popes were demonic.
The inclusion of the Apocrypha is not a 16th century invention. Pope Damasus announced the canon of the Old and New Testaments at the Council of Rome, issuing the Decretum Gelasianum, which explicitly included the Apocrypha. It wasn't until Luther removed these books that the Church was compelled to DEFINE (that is, bring to FINALITY) any discussion on what comprises Sacred Scripture.
The Assumption of Mary is not a 20th century invention. At the Council of Chalcedon in 451, when bishops from throughout the Mediterranean world gathered in Constantinople, Emperor Marcian asked the Patriarch of Jerusalem to bring the relics of Mary to Constantinople to be enshrined in the capitol. The patriarch explained to the emperor that there were no relics of Mary in Jerusalem, that "Mary had died in the presence of the apostles; but her tomb, when opened later . . . was found empty and so the apostles concluded that the body was taken up into heaven."
The feast, "Memory of Mary", was celebrated in Palestine after the building of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in 336. This feast was changed to the "Assumption of Mary" following the Council of Chalcedon I mentioned above.
The witholding of the wine from the laity at communion is a 16th Century invention.
This was in response to the heretic Ultraquists, who insisted that the host did not contain both the body and blood of Jesus - that it was requisite to consume both species. No Catholic needs to receive both species. One or the other suffices.
What is your source for that quote?
Excuse me for jumping in, but why didn't any of the Apostles, or any of the other writers of the Scriptures, write about this? Where is this written about?
The swipe at Luther is unjustified. According to The New Catholic Encyclopedia:
St. Jerome distinguished between canonical books and ecclesiastical books. The latter he judged were circulated by the Church as good spiritual reading but were not recognized as authoritative Scripture. The situation remained unclear in the ensuing centuries...For example, John of Damascus, Gregory the Great, Walafrid, Nicolas of Lyra and Tostado continued to doubt the canonicity of the deuterocanonical books. According to Catholic doctrine, the proximate criterion of the biblical canon is the infallible decision of the Church. This decision was not given until rather late in the history of the Chruch at the Council of Trent. The Council of Trent definitively settled the matter of the Old Testament Canon. That this had not been done previously is apparent from the uncertainty that persisted up to the time of Trent
It should also be noted that what Pope Damasus (and some other Roman bishops in the fourth, fifth and sixth centuries) declared in part canonical, Trent declared uncanonical, proving that Pope Damasus and the Decretum Gelasianum was not definitive as you portray it.
Cordially,