>>but they claim to be THE ONLY Christians!<<
What in the Sam Hill are you talking about?
Not Catholics.
THIRD QUESTION
Why was the expression “subsists in” adopted instead of the simple word “is”?
RESPONSE
The use of this expression, which indicates the full identity of the Church of Christ with the Catholic Church, does not change the doctrine on the Church. Rather, it comes from and brings out more clearly the fact that there are “numerous elements of sanctification and of truth” which are found outside her structure, but which “as gifts properly belonging to the Church of Christ, impel towards Catholic Unity”.[11]
“It follows that these separated churches and Communities, though we believe they suffer from defects, are deprived neither of significance nor importance in the mystery of salvation. In fact the Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as instruments of salvation, whose value derives from that fullness of grace and of truth which has been entrusted to the Catholic Church”[12].
Some people are just doofusi. Speaking generally.
“Not Catholics.”
This has been hashed out many many times on these threads. The Roman edifice does indeed see itself as the one true church. Even the use of the word “Catholic” which is another word for the Body of Christ suggests it. The Body of Christ is made up of all Christians. The Vatican and those who follow and obey it are not Christian.
“Why was the expression...”
So you are posting Vatican catechisms to proclaim the Vatican is right? Here’s a novel thought, post Scripture.
“Some people are just doofusi. Speaking generally.”
If you are speaking about yourself I won’t argue with you as you know yourself better than I do, but don’t you think you are being a little harsh on yourself? Generally speaking of course.