That certainly is the case in some instances. The difference is that Romanism is built upon the notion that all wisdom is locked up in the institutional Church. Clearly the passage I cited demands that faith be dependent on the sovereignty of God and not based on a speculative philosophy which artificially creates a human edifice as the apex.
The real difference is in how we define "Church". Catholics believe Christ instituted the Church with himself at the head and the Apostles in charge, and that as we see in scripture, the Apostles determine who succeed them on throughout history. Thus the Church is the Body of Christ, ""the pillar and foundation of truth," guided by the Holy Spirit and "the gates of hell shall not prevail against it"
In the Nicene creed (I believe) this is the "One holy, catholic and apostolic Church."
I don't expect you to believe the same, but understand that our belief is in Christ at the Head and Holy Spirit guiding His Church as the foundation of truth. You may see the Catholic Church as a "human edifice" but we do not.
Another difference is in authority. We believe the Church has authority, in this discussion, teaching authority.
Aside from beliefs, this is necessary to have one Church - a common teaching from a common authority.
In Protestantism in general today, this is not the case. The Scripture is often said to be the authority, however, Scripture does not teach itself, interpret itself, or if it does, it seems not to teach and interpret the same things in the same way to everyone. And each takes it on their own authority as to which is correct.
So, in summary, I believe the real "human edifice" is the one who claims the authority of the Church for him or herself.
thanks for your reply..