You found the Scripture perspicuous in that Caiaphas said it, you judged that he really meant ill, and concluded that he was a malefactor. These are matters that were clear to you.
Why then are you not at liberty in Catholicism to interpret all of Scripture for yourself?
What level of independent interpretation is necessary to know that Caiaphas was a malefactor and how does that differ from the position of the Catholic Church?
You found the Scripture perspicuous
I found one part of Scripture less than utterly opaque.
Why then are you not at liberty in Catholicism to interpret all of Scripture for yourself?
For the same reason that the Judaizers were obliged, with Paul to take their disagreement to the Council at Jerusalem and then to abide by the decsision which the Council described as seeming good to the Holy Spirit as well as to themselves.