You absolutely and most certainly do ignore Paul. :) "Interpreting Paul in light of the Gospels" is code for ignoring Paul completely whenever he disagrees with Catholic theology (which is often). Recently you have said yourself that you do not believe Paul was Trinitarian. Therefore, you must ignore the many Pauline scriptures that have been given to you showing that he understood and believed in the Trinity.
I have found that the correct interpretation of Paul according to Catholicism leaves little left of Paul's actual words. I think that Judith Anne's testimony of her opinion of Paul's actual words is really closer to the true opinion of many Catholics about Paul (at least around here).
There appear to be two very distinct Catholic approaches. One is like Judith Anne's, read Paul's actual words, understand them for what they are, and disagree with many of them. The other approach is like yours, say that Paul was right when read through the prism of the Catholic view of the Gospels. The problem with this, though, is that it obliterates what Paul actually said and changes it into something completely different. So, to me when a Catholic says that Paul was right he is really speaking of some other invented Paul, not the one portrayed in the Bible.
This has been a VERY instructive thread. I never knew that some Roman Catholics believe the words of Paul were not inspired by God, but that, instead, as we've been told, Paul was "insane."
Ah Paul, if only he’d had a red pencil tho
Some? How many is 'some'. We have been well instructed by you that 'often' means 'once'. We Catholics use the base 10 decimal system. What do the Reformed use?