Your original statement was:
By denying the literal, intended sense of Jesus' Words, you do injustice to the passage.
My opinion is that Catholicism infrequently takes the literal meaning of a verse, or the common sense meaning of a verse (or passage). You have consistently held that the intended sense of Jesus' words is something completely different from the words themselves. It is a secret code, only decipherable by the Catholic hierarchy. :) The Bible doesn't say what it says, it in fact says something completely different, all the way up to being in the opposite. My comment was in light of all this, that it is funny that you should accuse me of doing an injustice to the passage, when your meaning of so many passages is so unjust to the words of those passages, of course, in my opinion.
At least in my discussions with you I always took the literal meaning. What is typically happening though is that the Protestants tend to look at the scripture myopically and overlook the context. It does not make their reading plain or literal, it makes it incorrect.
There are things in the faith of the fathers that do not come directly from the scripture, such as veneration of saints. But when the scripture is the direct justification for a doctrine, it is read literally. It is not read literalistically as if theology were a Bible quoting bee.