1) thats the issue with Post Vatican Two Rome...there is a Taxonomical Issue now with what do you class as a Roman Catholic. I dont believe Rome has control over half its clergy let alone its flock...soooo one has to ask, just who is teaching what, and who is controlling what is being taught, and what is a Roman Catholic...for example, recently there has been a dialogue between the Vatican and the society of Pius...this is a group that split from Rome during Vatican two...are they the true catholics?? Even they dont have half the medieval Catholic blah...so in the fundemental state, Roman Catholics, TRUE Roman Catholics adhering to the Constantine Era, simply do not exist, not even in the Vatican...what you have now is honnestly nearly as bad as the spectrum in Anglicanism. except the Vatican cant admit that...they are screwed, because if they publically denounce the past, they loooose their power and authority and their purpose for being as a denomination. If they admit that they have no control over their flock, they admit that each Roman Catholic does what they want...some worship Mary, some do not, some believe in purgatory, some do not. Instantly they have lost power and authority also. So the Vatican lives several lies all at the same time.
2) Jesus didnt authorize any Baptism. He was Baptised, and the pauline tradition kept Baptism alive in his name. Jesus authorised Baptism by the Spirit of Fire...that has nothing to do with water, and nothing to do with imersion...everything else is symbolism...which without the power of GOD is absolutely meaningless. Now...I've yet to hear you say that we should all pour gasoline over our heads and ignite ourselves so as to be baptised by fire...which, incidently, some oriental religions will support, though not for baptism...but for peaceful protest.
3) passover has a lot to do with mysticism. You just dont count it as such because it happened on such a large scale that everyone saw...but the first few plagues were recreated by the Eygption Magicians...and then it went off the deep end. Besides...havent you heard that some Statues bleed, and some drink milk
4) it follows logically that its possible. Thats the point. Do I agree with it...I dont really care, as I said before: its not something that I do...but I'll tell you that IF I prayed to any saint, it certainly wouldnt be Mary
5) The Hail Mary reverers Mary...I dont see there is much wrong with that. I just dont feel the need to bother myself. The things attested to her in the prayer are true, although perhaps its a bit overboard to give her silly titles like they do...I mean they arent even accurate...How can she be "Queen of Heaven" when Jesus is King...she isnt his Wife...She's his Mother
its just a little pompous...but being British I'm used to that sort of hype and dont give it a second thought.
The Hail Mary isnt even a prayer on its own...its part of a prayer known as "The Angelus" which is a variation on a theme of the Magnificat. Here is my favourite version of it
(I cant get over her perfect diction and pronunciation of latin, particularly right near the end when she is basically singing a tonguetwister at fast tempo!
6) there is nothing wrong with confession to a priest, confession to your friends, confession to GOD or...confessions to the police
There MIGHT be an problem with absolution IF the confessor, or the priest, doesnt remember who really does the absolution. The priest is only a spokes person for GOD...he's a little like a white house correspondant...he can tell you all about what the president will do...but he cant actually do it
Now...I didnt come here to talk about Romanism...I came to tell you that The Book of Common Prayer isnt part of it. Thats all I have to say really