“Why do you think we believe any differently? “
Because I’ve read papal proclamations. The ones I read cited various saints for authority, rather than explaining how their arguments had validity.
An argument has no authority because it comes from Luther or Augustine. For authority, it need to comply with scripture. That is the difference between citing authorities and reading commentary.
They cite scripture all over the place.
I'm not sure why you think that an encyclical which gives a reference to a particular writing by a particular church father or saint has to reiterate and explain his entire argument.
The only thing that has the kind of "he said it, therefore I believe it" authority you're talking about in the Catholic Church would be Scripture, and the infallible pronouncements of Councils and Popes. The writings of Augustine are neither of those two things, therefore, anything Augustine wrote is valid only insofar as it does not contradict those sources.
An argument has no authority because it comes from Luther or Augustine. For authority, it need to comply with scripture.
An argument has no authority because it comes from James White, either, yet you cite him.
By the way, who is qualified to judge whether Luther's, or Augustine's, or White's argument "complies with scripture" or not ... and who gave that judge that authority?
So every time the pope issues a statement of some kind he should include a section which explains how and to what degree and why statements sourced to something not in the Bible are authoritative? WHY Should he do this? If the question is already settled, more or less, why hash it out again?
The possibility that a protestant might not understand the way other documents are used as authorities cannot be allowed to dominate every statement by the Pope; that would be silly.