* The original Hebrew Matthew said "He," not "they."
Unless you post a link to the version of Scripture you want to claim as canonical and proof that it is canonical, please do not claim there are errors in the version of Scripture we have.
Concerning the list of woes, this reads more like a condemnation of behavior and priorities. Since the Pharisees were well known for believing that there was an Oral Torah, I would expect a very clear condemnation of that belief. Back to the Woes, I suggest you google the 7 types of Pharisees if you are interested in the Pharisaic view of the Pharisees.
Here is one resource. The 5 bad types of Pharisees are very easy for a lot of Christians to fall into. Nicodemus and Gamaliel were Pharisees.
Concerning call no man father:
There are repeated references to Apostles addressing people as little children, e.g., "My little Children" (1Jn2:1). Since all the Apostles are men, they are calling themselves the fathers of those individuals.
Concerning sitting on Moses seat:
Since the Pharisees hold that there is and Oral and a Written Torah, it would be very odd to say they sit on Moses' seat if Jesus condemns their belief that God gave Moses two Torahs.
Concerning Matthew 15:
Jesus' specific condemnation is over them permitting someone to honor the Temple above their father and mother. There was a dispute in Pharisaic Judaism over whether this was permitted (Tractate Nedarim 9). The conclusion of this reasoning is that something dedicated to the Temple is dedicated to God. Honoring father and mother are not necessarily. Interesting to note, is that Jesus does not respond to their initial inquiry about the hand washing ritual. He ignores it. The parallel passage in Mark 7, has some of his disciples observing it and some not observing it.
However, this connects back to the other passage. First, what is the hand washing ritual? It is a ritual in Pharisaic Judaism involving washing hands because certain things imparted a minor ritual impurity on someone. Major ritual impurities required bathing in a Mikveh. Second, what does he say in Matthew 23 about washing? He criticizes the Pharisees for worrying about washing the outside rather than the inside. He does not criticize them for ritual washing. Back to Matt. 15, Jesus states that it is what comes out of the mouth, not what goes into the mouth, that defiles the body. So what does wash and how do we wash, the inside of the body? Rev 7:14 states that the blood of the Lamb washes. Specifically it says robes; however, I am uncertain what clothes represent in Revelation. It would appear that to wash the insides of our bodies, we need to drink the Blood of the Lamb. Rev. 7 also uses the active not passive; it says the people present washed, not were washed.
This would appear to be a significant fraction of the Catholic Eucharist. An objection that I have seen to the Eucharist is the lack of mention in John. If the Eucharist were as important as Catholics say it is, why is the institution left out of John?
There are a couple answers. The first is that it actually is not important. My answer is that it is in John, but not where we expect it to be. Instead it is at the beginning of John (ch. 2). In this scene Jesus takes water from the jugs used for ritual washing and converts it into wine and then has the steward of the feast taste it. The steward's response is that this is the best wine. So he has taken water used to wash the outside of someone and turned it into wine so it would wash the insides.
How do we get to the Eucharist? At the last supper, Jesus turns wine into his blood and then commands his Apostles to drink it.
To summarize, Jesus criticizes the Pharisees for washing the outside not the inside. By this point, he had transformed the hand-washing ritual into a wine drinking ritual (which would wash the insides). At the very end of his ministry he transforms it into a blood drinking ritual. After his resurrection, he shows to John that his blood washes.