I feel somewhat silly responding to these questions, in the same way that I would feel silly trying to explain in painful detail to a five year old how a critical surgical procedure is accomplished from beginning to end. If a question is asked by a five year old, it is usually an innocent inquiry into what they perceive to be a reality. So, I would approach my response to their reality - simply by expalining as best I could at their level what was taking place in a surgical procedure. What I mean is that these questions are true to the extent to which they are substantiated in the Bible. They may not necessarily be true in reference and subsequent to your desire as to the meaning of these verses. The confusion that exists here is not between what the Catholic Church teaches or practices in relation to what the Bible states. The confusion exists between what you want to believe the Church teaches and practices in relation to what you have decided a particular verse means. On both sides of this equation, we have the incredibly weak theological, historical and christological link of YOU. But, in the hope that you truly do want to know the truth (although you and Mr. Rudd have repeatedly shown that you don't), I will endeavor to address these topics.
The following list give a summation of what we have been trying to emphasize. If the Bible is a Catholic book:
1. Why does it condemn clerical dress? (Matt. 23:5-6). A. The issue being addressed is not condemn distinctive clothing of a ministerial priesthood, any more than the mention of sitting at the head table condemns sitting next to the bride and groom during a wedding reception. The issue deals with pridefully gaining worldly praise and honor through actions and dress. If you look at the verse in context, it deals with what the Pharises do outside of the temple. Christ is not condemning the dress or position of them during worship.
2. Why does it teach against the adoration of Mary? (Luke 11:27-28). A. The new and different motherhood which Jesus speaks of to his disciples refers precisely to Mary in a very special way. Is not Mary the first of "those who hear the word of God and do it"? And therefore does not the blessing uttered by Jesus in response to the woman in the crowd refer primarily to her? Without any doubt, Mary is worthy of blessing by the very fact that she became the mother of Jesus according to the flesh ("Blessed is the womb that bore you, and the breasts that you sucked"), but also and especially because already at the Annunciation she accepted the word of God, because she believed it, because she was obedient to God, and because she "kept" the word and "pondered it in her heart" (cf. Lk. 1:38, 45; 2:19, 51) and by means of her whole life accomplished it. Thus we can say that the blessing proclaimed by Jesus is not in opposition, despite appearances, to the blessing uttered by the unknown woman, but rather coincides with that blessing in the person of this Virgin Mother, who called herself only "the handmaid of the Lord" (Lk. 1:38). If it is true that "all generations will call her blessed" (cf. Lk. 1:48). then it can be said that the unnamed woman was the first to confirm unwittingly that prophetic phrase of Mary's Magnificat and to begin the Magnificat of the ages.
3. Why does it show that all Christians are priests? (1 Pet. 2:5,9). The Bible clearly states that all Christians are priests in this selection, as the Catholic Church clearly teaches for all who bother to read its teachings, see Catechism of the Catholic Church 1141-4, 1268, 1305, 1535, 1547, 1591-2 on the common priesthood. But the Bible also said the same thing about the Israelites (Ex. 19:6), yet this did not prevent there from being a separate, ministerial priesthood even before the Law of Moses was given (Ex. 19:22, 24). Furthermore, since the top, Old Testament office of high priest corresponds to Jesus, the New Testament high priest, and since the bottom, Old Testament universal priesthood corresponds to the New Testament universal priesthood, the middle, ministerial priesthood in the Old Testament corresponds to a middle, ministerial priesthood in the New Testament.
4. Why does it forbid us to address religious leaders as "father"? (Matt. 23:9). First, it does not say "religious leaders". It says "And call no one on earth your father..." So, unless you want to add some extra-biblical eisegetical interpretation on this phrase that is un-biblical, the only real interpretation is that Jesus is merely stating that the worship and honor due to God is for God only. Otherwise, Paul is one of the first humans in history to break this rule by telling Christians in his letters that he is their father in the faith.