How do you know the Church interpretation is not the original intent of the inspired author? As Leo XIII teaches, the apparent error is in the reader, not in the writer.
Yes, but not for reasons spelled out by +Leo XIII. The error of the reader is precisely in believing that every word in the Bible was dictated by God, rather than believing that the message, as reported by author in his own words and style, is an imperfect rendition of God's perfect truth. In other words, don't believe the words, believe the message.
***How do you know the Church interpretation is not the original intent of the inspired author? As Leo XIII teaches, the apparent error is in the reader, not in the writer.***
Let us differentiate between intent and achievement. The OT is chock full of the Jews misunderstanding God, based upon the revelation of Jesus. The reason that Jesus invested so much time and effort upon creating the Church is that this is the entity upon Earth that is intended to be the teaching authority.
Remember that the current NT did not exist except as some of many that gradually went into circulation in the first three centuries. The Church formulated doctrine ahead of the NT compilation. And that is from the original documents that were copied and copied and copied somewhat inaccurately.
That does not even include the deliberate alteration of the NT that occurred over time, both in the pre Nicene era and in the post Nicene era. Look at the English translations that became a travesty of understanding of Scripture. Even the NAB has not escaped the liberal alteration, although it is the Church’s interpretation that saves it.