Your response is simply another example of your refusal of objectivity, and as before, to acknowledge anything that impugns your church, as the fact is that the list shows that Catholics under sola ecclesia can also be “are a pretty disagreeable lot” on what their Church, and Tradition, History and Scripture teaches.
And which your own attempts to to clean up the errors in the what Catholics can disagree on” according to how you see it, can illustrate.
And while your point is that Scripture is not self interpreting, neither is the supreme authority for Catholics, with its “formulations” etc. that has resulted in the SSPX and sedevacantist dissent, in commitment to historical RC teaching.
It really suggests a lack of humility that whenever I attack your argument you respond by attacking me rather than my points. We are never going to agree and your chances of changing my mind by the volume of your posts is zero. Your scholarship pales in comparison to that of the Early Church Fathers, the doctors of the Church, the Episcopacy that forms the Magisterium, and the various saints and intellectual giants upon whose writings I have based my interpretation of Scripture.
I respect you and your right to have your own opinions, I just don't respect them. At least we are making progress in that you are no longer defending the notion that Scripture can be self interpreting.
Peace be with you.