Actually, the reason evangelicals have historically contended for these and other doctrines, while opposing other teachings of Rome, is because the former are Scripturally substantiated, enduring challenges under SS while the latter do not depend upon the weight of Scriptural warrant, but rest upon the premise of the assured infallibility of Rome.
In addition, as said before, the premise that those who formulate doctrines are the assuredly infallible interpreters of Scripture effectively nukes the church, as it was the Jews who both the stewards of Scripture and the promises, etc. (Rm. 3:2; 94), and sat in the seat of Moses, and had the rightful claim to historical decent, while Christianity was founded by an itinerant Preacher in their darkened eyes, but who established His claims by Scriptural substantiation.
Furthermore, the faith that Evangelicals have historically contended for commonly held core truths, is contrary to the polemic of SS preventing such, and while individualism is apparent therein, so it is within Catholicism, in which there is commonly consent to core truths, while disagreement can and does abound about many things*, even as to which teachings particular are infallible and thus require full assent of faith, besides the meaning of such and others, and of Scripture texts. And your yourself disagree here with other RCS about Lumen Gentium.
*http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/DisagrementsSSandSE.html
There has been no greater violence done to understanding of the history of Christianity then the trying to trace the “developed” practice and doctrine backwards into the historical-apostolic Christianity.
To cite an example: The office of priest with all it’s graduations and titles.
No such office can be found in Scripture yet terms like elder, older man, overseer, etc. are mistranslated as “priest” and “priestly” functions discovered in the actions of the older men and overseers.