Well, last week Francis Beckwith (who is now a professor at Baylor) debated Timothy George at Wheaton University on the topic of whether someone can be an evangelical and a Catholic at once. It's found here, and Christianity Today wrote about it here. The following is from the CT article about the debate:
As George and Beckwith fielded audience questions, authority emerged as another key point of ongoing tension. George reminisced about late-night debates with the late Father Richard John Neuhaus in his New York apartment. George said Neuhaus told him, "You Protestant evangelicals want to talk about orthodoxy, but you have orthodoxy on the cheap. You want the Trinity and Christology, but you don't want the pope and the Magisterium." George responded, "The problem is that you Roman Catholics have orthodoxy with a surcharge. You're adding too much to it." He defended Protestant evangelicalism as the best way to be catholic, that is, in succession with the New Testament and the church of the apostles. As much as he reveres the late John Paul II and Benedict XVI as the two best popes since the Reformation, George does not view them as vicars of Christ on the earth or successors to Peter.
This difference came into even sharper focus when Beckwith described how he came to trust church authority in two controversial dogmas. The Roman Catholic Church made belief in Mary's immaculate conception binding in 1854, and followed in 1950 by teaching her bodily assumption. He compared these difficult doctrines to God's order for the Jews to kill every Canaanite man, woman, and child.
"You don't throw away the Bible if you can't understand everything," Beckwith said. "Once I understood apostolic succession and the authority of the Magisterium, a lot followed."
When asked to define the gospel, however, Beckwith and George found common ground once more. Beckwith deferred to George, who recited Paul's words in 1 Corinthians 15:3-5 from memory. "For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve."
I really don't mind the veneration of Mary, because as I understand it, veneration is different than worship, which is due only to God. However, I do NOT understand the doctrine of a sinless, perpetual virgin who ascended to heaven. I don't understand why the Catholic church passed these things SO late in the game... seems sort of anti-tradition...
There's several other things I do not understand as well, and the difficulty in discussing them with Catholics is that ultimately it just comes back around to authority. For them, ultimately it doesn't have to have a reason or make sense, if the Church has declared it to be true officially, then that is the end of it.
From the outside looking in, I simply don't know how to deal with that.