I'm on my way to bed after a very long day... but I will address at least two of the issues you brought up:
#1 - Pope=Power. For centuries, the Pope had ultimate power - even Kings had to be approved by the Pope or they were not king. And it is some of those same church leaders who pushed the Roman Empire to expand throughout Europe - along the way "converting" the unwashed masses along the way. Unfortunately that same path included adopting much of the practices of those same-said heathen to make "Christianity" more palatable, but thus adulterating the supposedly sacred Church traditions.
#2 - The belief in Transubstantiation (as that seems to be the primary focus of the answer.com response you used) - one url of interest that sheds a bit of unpleasant light on the subject http://www.remnantofgod.org/transubstantiation.htm#girl
Where in the Bible is it listed that the "host" used in Holy Communion has to contain Gluten???? In fact, the only stipulation I can find in the Bible is a reference to "unleavened" bread. And the fact is - without taking Comunion that satisfies the Church, this girl is in spiritual danger.... Seems rather ironic that the "Host" used in the Catholic Comunion is in a form that would have been completely alien to Christ and his apostles. But that isn't a huge issue, other than where does the Church get such a specific "quality" to the Host used, yet won't recognize a rice wafer because it doens't have gleuten?
The same page that the URL above refers too has a great deal of comparison and direct quotes from official Catholic writings and doctrine. But I won't leave it there....
Here is another interesting page of info on the subject:
http://www.webtruth.org/articles/theological-issues-23/transubstantiation-49.html
And yet another bit of interesting Church history is that, even within the Church, there has been serious debate over Transusbstantiation including "Ratranmus, a contemporary monk at the monastery of Corbie. Ratranmus wrote: "The bread and wine are the body and blood of Christ in a figurative sense" (De corpore et sanguine Christi).", an issue that wasn't "settled" until the Lateran Council in 1215.
And yet one more (for now) url:
http://www.blessedquietness.com/journal/housechu/transub.htm
OK - found one more:
http://www.bible.ca/ntx-communion.htm
#3 - The Church being against translation of the Bible into the common man's language.... Are you trying to say that the only authentic language for the Bible is Latin? How much of the Bible was originally penned in Latin? Oh - wait, none of it. The original languages were primarily HEbrew, Aramaic, and Greek. At the time the Church chose to use latin, it was still a language in use (not a "dead language" - the reason it is now used in the medical and legal fields). The stand the Church took against having the Bible in the tongue of the "common man" was primarily because of power - not to protect the text. Yes, there is an ongoing debate over translation - and I don't see an end to it, but now that the Bible is available in English (and more and more languages to reach more and more people with God's word), the debate SHOULD remain on being as accurate as is humanly possible, praying that God places faithful people in place to maintain the message He has for the world in a form that is reliable and true to God's Word.
#4 -"What unscriptural practices and traditions do we have? I'm guessing you have the wrong idea about Catholicism and believe what these silly tracts say."
How about this one - worship of Saints.
http://www.ianpaisley.org/article.asp?ArtKey=saints
http://www.carm.org/catholic/prayertosaints.htm
And please notice that I didn't use any Chick Gospel tracts....
I choose to walk TO God's Word, not away from it. I have found that the stronger my prayer life has grown, the more sincere and consistant my study of the bible has become, and More effort I have put into seeking Him, the more I feel I understand (but the counter to that is that the more I learn and think I understand, the more I find I don't know!).
What I do know - of the many Catholics I know - some I believe truly place thier faith and trust in Christ alone for the Salvatin of their soul, while others claime to place the same-said faith and trust in Christ, but worry that strict adherance to what truly amounts to a pattern of works to bring justification is what is most important - thus determining their ultimate fate.
That's all for now - it's WAY past my bed time! Have fun!
I'm not going to be able to debate this with you. The stuff you have here has been argued ad nauseam on these threads. I know you can find an the article about the little girl on this forum.
I don't answer "where in the bible" questions. I strongly recommend this book to answer all those questions for you.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0879736933/002-7455162-5061614?v=glance&n=283155
I also don't generally go to anti-Catholic websites looking for "official Catholic writings and doctrine". You want official? Read this.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1574551094/qid=1149785487/sr=2-2/ref=pd_bbs_b_2_2/002-7455162-5061614?s=books&v=glance&n=283155
There are so many things wrong in the links you sent me that I don't even know where to begin!!! Again, when you learn the faith of the Catholic Church from Catholic sources then you may correctly understand where we are coming from.
You must be kidding about the saint worship. I can't believe that is even an issue around here anymore. We don't worship saints. Try this for your answer to that one.
http://www.catholic.com/library/Saint_Worship.asp
It's kind of silly for us to go back and forth with our links. I'm using Catholic sources to promote the Catholic faith. You are using non-Catholic sources to attempt to rip apart the Catholic faith.
You have a long way to go in understanding the Catholic faith correctly. Quit looking at sites that bash the church because they are so full of lies and half-truths that it is sickening! You'll never learn anything but hatred there.
Sorry it took so long to get back to you. May God continue to bless you!