I freely answer any and al questions posed here about which I have an opinion or feel I can contribute. All are free to do the same.
As for the universality of the Catholic faith in its professing of one faith to all peoples, it should be remembered that the lanugage of the Church remains Latin. All written communications about the faith, beliefs, practices, anything, are written in Latin and the meaning of the Latin is the ruling meaning. By this I mean, if there is ambiguity in what a certain teaching of the Church, or directive from the Church means in English, or Swahili, the Church will go to the original language of Latin and decide what is really meant.
This is one aspect of the universality -- we are all teaching and praying and worshipping from one set of documents, translated into all of th world's tongues, and yet one. There is not a Catechism in Chinese that teaches diferently fom a Catechism in Spanish. They are all based upon, and (ideally) faithfully reflect the one teaching of the one church.
Another aspect of this universality is that the faith was spread to other cultures and peoples "on the ground" with teachers. Christian communities did not spring up in various locales in the world which were later collected under one governance. If this were the case we could expect the local organic growth of conflicting theories, like we see in Protestantism. Rather the faith was spread with local adaptations and focus, but retaining the oneness.
Now is "professing" synonymous with "practicing"? Ideally yes, but not always, or not necessarily. There is always dissent and non-standard practice, but this doesn't mean that there is not a clear defined orthodoxy and practice.
SD