Are you sure that it doesn't mean that Scripture alone contains all of the revealed Word necessary for Salvation as your Protestant Brothers and sisters contend? You are much closer to Catholic than you may realize. The definition you put forth mirrors the teachings of the Catholic Church;
CCC - 109 "In Sacred Scripture, God speaks to man in a human way. To interpret Scripture correctly, the reader must be attentive to what the human authors truly wanted to affirm, and to what God wanted to reveal to us by their words."
This is accomplished by the teaching authority of the Church, the Magesterium, given the Church through Apostolic Succession (What you shall bind on earth.... Matthew 18:18) is the great minds coming together to correctly interpret the revealed Word across the millennium and the many languages and cultures involved.
Are you sure that it doesn’t mean that Scripture alone contains all of the revealed Word necessary for Salvation as your Protestant Brothers and sisters contend?
___________________________________—
Pretty sure. Sola Scriptura was a reaction to the Romanist view of adding tradition to the scriptures and then making that combination the standard.
My Roman Catholic friends and I who wrestle with these things do believe that where we trust in Christ is the place where we meet in doctrine. My biggest issue with the RC church is that way too many people depend entirely on the church, become formulaic and do not come to grips with the fact that we will stand alone before God at the judgment.
But we all must trust Christ. I think you would say you trust Him first, and the church second. I would say the same. After that, it is definitions, where we all break down.
My opinion on SS and how it departs from what you claim as Catholic teaching is this: I think SS is a restrictive doctrine, while your doctrine is permissive.
In more detail, SS requires a scriptural basis for any doctrine; it appears to an outsider that you can have a Catholic doctrine so long as it isn’t contradicted by scripture.
Or in other words, in SS a person would ask “where does the Bible say that you should practice that doctrine, while in a permissive view a person would ask “where does the Bible say that you CAN’T practice that doctrine?
This is a general argument — I’m sure you are aware of many specific doctrines where the two sides argue that the Bible DOES specifically prohibit it, or that the Bible doesn’t allow it.
The permissive/restrictive construct is a common philosophical divide, not confined to religion. Constitutional arguments often hinge on a permissive/restritive viewpoint.