Just because we don't agree doesn't mean Rome has a definitive answer. That's simply bad logic.
You just agreed you do not know what the bible says, because we disagree on the meaning of it. So the entire thread proposition is a falasy based on sola scriptura
QED
I can only point out that for the first Millenium there was only the universal church, with the bishop of Rome having accepted primacy : we may since disagree with orthodox on the scope and extent of that, we did agree on the fact.
The name Roman Catholic was an name others gave it, it was the only and universal church in origin. And it is responsible for creed, New Testament , from the first early fathers it was stated that all should look to Rome, read iraneus.
Without it you would not know what was canonical.
So scripture, history and authority all agree with what I say.
Which is that to know " what the bible says" you must refer to authority and tradition.
Upvote
0