https://www.crisismagazine.com/2021/is-the-catholic-church-a-house-of-cards

 https://www.catholiceducation.org/en/controversy/common-misconceptions/let-my-people-go-the-catholic-church-and-slavery.html

 https://etd.ohiolink.edu/!etd.send_file?accession=dayton1470605225&disposition=inline

A Confession by the Curmudgeon: Why I'm Leaving the Catholic Church Again 

[I should point out this is a piece of satire, lest anyone who doesn't actually click the link but only sees the title gets the wrong idea]

"Whose Righteousness Was Reckoned" (Jimmy Akin)

"No, Christmas Isn't Secretly Pagan" (Luke T. Harrington)

"Full of Grace"

https://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=1050058

Meta-Bigotry (Edward Feser)

Seven Answers to the "Pro-Lifers are just Pro-Birth" Argument (Joe Heschmeyer)

Defending Christian Culture and the Fall of Secularism (Shane Schaetzel)

Making New Memories in the LeBaron (Joel Morehouse)

Dei Verbum  on inerrancy:

http://unamsanctamcatholicam.blogspot.com/2008/11/happy-43rd-anniversary-to-dei-verbum.html

The Gospel According to Steve Martin (Mark Shea)

A good comment I found on a blog replying to a person asking how Catholics distinguish in their own behavior the difference between adoration (which should be directed towards God alone) and veneration (which may be shown to creatures):

Anon,

I don’t mean to be insensitive or condescending so take my remarks in charity. I think the reason so many Protestants think Catholics are idolaters is because Protestants do not know what proper worship is.

I use "worship" in a specific sense, adoration or latria. There is a specific act that has universally qualified as worship in the human experience of religion: sacrificing. Examples would include the Temple sacrifices as well as the one Sacrifice of Christ on the Cross that is re-presented in un-bloody form at the mass.

There are other things that show reverence and should be done but don't in and of themselves alone reach to the level of latria. An example would be singing hymns and psalms of praise. If that did qualify as latria then at every baseball game we would be idolatrously worshipping the flag. There is a qualitative difference regarding the actions.

Protestantism has abandoned the true and proper worship of God that He instituted in abandoning the Sacrifice of the Mass. Instead it has substituted pious acts that do not objectively qualify as acts of exclusive worship. If one does not know what actions constitute true and exclusive worship (latria) then how can one judge when reverence for something else has crossed the point into actions reserved exclusively to God? If a person believes that a bow (such as one makes in veneration) is latria and a gesture appropriate only to God then they would see any reverential bow not directed to God (say a formal Japanese greeting) as improper. Context is crucial to a proper understanding and so is knowing the proper definition of something. If one erroneously believes that something they do is latria, even if it doesn't objectively qualify as such, they will think that anyone else doing the same action is giving latria.

To make sacrifice to is to give latria - that is why the early Christians could not sacrifice to the Emperor. The Temple sacrifices were acts of latria toward God. The immolation of children to Moloch or the human sacrifices of the Aztecs were acts of latria - latria directed towards demons. Singing psalms and hymns of praise is worship in the general sense (giving reverence) but not in the exclusive sense of something reserved to God alone. Those within the Church know that no creature could ever take the place of God. However, to those outside of the strictures of the Church who think that the honor they give God is worship (latria) proper then the veneration given by Catholics and Orthodox to things other than God seems like idolatry.

I would also point out that your husband is making a presumptive statement in saying that “true idolaters did not believe their idol was a god.” I would argue that some of them certainly did. However, whether they thought the idol was a god or represented a god (the demons of 1 Cor 10:20) they were sacrificing (the pagans did sacrifice) to things other than God. Catholics most certainly do not sacrifice anything to our representations of the Saints and if one did then he would be an idolater and outside the Church.

and, in a follow-up comment, the same commenter writes:

Anon, I would like to expound on my previous post. I still maintain that Protestantism is deficient in not giving to God the proper and exclusive act of latria that He commanded (the un-bloody Sacrifice of the Mass) through conscious or unconscious omission in the Evangelical flavor or through the loss of the priesthood in the “high-church” bent. However, I may have come across as implying that Protestants offer no worship to God and that was never my intent. My point was that the acts of worship Protestantism gives to God are externally indistinguishable from acts given to mere creatures in other contexts. It is internal disposition that makes all the difference but such a thing is unknowable to us mere humans. I have seen many a good Protestant kneeling in prayer to their Lord. That does not then make a man an idolater if he then kneels while proposing to his girl. Your husband was greatly disturbed by the crowning of Mary but the good Protestants of England were not idolaters when they crowned their good Protestant Queen, Elizabeth. Many a Catholic bride gives a bouquet of flowers to the Virgin Mary by laying them in front of a statue or icon of her but that does not constitute idolatry any more than giving flowers to one’s own mother does. Every act of a Catholic venerating statues and icons of the Saints and especially Our Lady that Protestants take as idolatry are perfectly valid and legitimate acts of honor when done to another living person. There is nothing in and of themselves that sets them apart as latria, the worship due exclusively to God. If an act is not per se latria then it can only be the internal motive that can distinguish between what is proper to a creature and what should be given only to God. Since no man can know the inner mind of another then we are in no position to judge the actions of others as being idolatrous if they are not of themselves an action that can be given only to God. The only action I know that is reserved exclusively to worship of God is sacrificing and that is what I spoke of in my last post. Catholics know what is due to God alone and what honor can legitimately be given to a creature. If your husband is concerned by an action then he should ask the motives of the person doing the act and not presume that an act of legitimate honor is idolatry. Until he sees a Catholic immolating a turtle-dove or other such act at a statue of Our Lady, then he has no objective evidence of idolatry, only prejudice.

A later commenter also makes a point that I had never thought of before, but which is quite true:

"The Church of Rome is not idolatrous, unless Arianism is orthodoxy" - John Henry Cardinal Newman

If the laudatory titles given to Christ by the Arians (which were much greater than those given by Catholics to Mary) were not sufficient to describe God Himself, then Catholics have nothing to worry about. Even the most extreme veneration given to Christ as the greatest creature of God still wasn't enough for the orthodox Fathers to accept that the Arians were truly worshiping Him, so even the highest titles given to Mary are not enough to accuse Catholics of idolatry.

"The highest of creatures is leveled with the lowest in comparison of the One Creator Himself."

http://patrickmadrid.blogspot.com/2010/06/did-you-hear-one-about-how-catholics.html

The Long, Twisted Story of All Hallows Eve (Mark Shea)

Harry Potter and the Attack of the Critics (Martin Cothran)

This is an article I liked greatly, not so much for the specific topic of Harry Potter (which I have no great passionate opinion on one way or the other), but for the larger questions concerning literature in general it addresses.

1582 Douay-Rheims New Testament

The 1582 Douay-Rheims New Testament (original edition before the Challoner revisions)

Matthew 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17* 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 
Mark 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 
Luke 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
John 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
Acts 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Romans 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 
1 Corinthians 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
2 Corinthians 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Galatians 1 2 3 4 5 6
Ephesians 1 2 3 4 5 6
Philippians 1 2 3 4
Colossians 1 2 3 4
1 Thessalonians 1 2 3 4 5
2 Thessalonians 1 2 3
1 Timothy 1 2 3 4 5 6
2 Timothy 1 2 3 4
Titus 1 2 3
Philemon 1
Hebrews 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11* 12 13
James 1 2 3 4 5
1 Peter 1 2 3 4 5
2 Peter 1 2 3
1 John 1 2 3 4 5 
2 John 1
3 John 1
Jude 1
Apocalypse 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22


*Missing part of chapter and/or annotations
___________________________________________

Other Material

Title Page
Censure and Approbation
Preface to the Reader
Books of the New Testament
The Signification or Meaning of the  Numbers and Marks Used in This New Testament
The Sum of the New Testament
The Sum of the Four Gosepls
The Sum and Order of the Evangelical History
A Table of S. Peter
A Table of S. Paul
Of the other Apostles
The Apostles Creed
The Argument of the Epistles in General
The Explication of Certain Words in this Translation
A Table of Certain Places of the New Testament Corruptly Translated in Favour of Heresies of These Days in the English Editions
A Table of the Epistles and Gospels
An Ample and Particular Table Directing the Reader to the Catholic Truths
Faults Escaped in the Text

"Marriage Inflation" (Edward Feser)

 Differences Among Catholics No Prejudice to the Unity of the Church (John Henry Newman)

The Argument from Scale (James Chastek)

How "Once Saved, Always Saved" Destroys the Assurance of Salvation (Gary Hoge)