The Catholic Church has a love-hate relationship with the Bible. One of their official doctrines is that it is, indeed, the word of God, and thus is "...to be accepted and venerated with the same sense of loyalty and reverence" as what they call "Sacred Tradition". However, when you compare Scripture and Catholic tradition, it soon becomes apparent that you cannot be loyal to both, as they contradict each other left, right, and centre.
To get around this glaring problem, the Catholic Church claims they, and they alone, have the authority to interpret the Bible. This, of course, is ridiculous. Being a book, the Bible can be read like a book. In fact, the longest chapter in the entire Bible is Psalm 119, which is dedicated to explaining the benefits of individual Bible study. Catholics cannot realistically affirm this Psalm, because they claim they are the light to a man's path, rather than God and His word.
But the Catholic Church isn't pure evil. It has a few good qualities. It affirms the virgin birth, the Trinity, the Resurrection, and several other Christian doctrines. In particular, Catholicism continues to affirm a Godly view of sexual morality. This includes an opposition to the transgender ideology. This ideology posits that, rather than gender being a biological reality, it is actually a sexual construct. This is because they allow people to identify their own gender (when it's convenient). A man, like Caitlyn Jenner or Rachel Levine, can identify as a woman, and vice versa. At this point in time, gender is not even considered a binary. You don't have to identify as a man or a woman. Rather, you can be one of a now infinite number of made up genders, such as "cake gender".
Of course, the natural result of all of this is that the 99% of the population that doesn't feel the need to change their actual gender also need a new label. You can't just call yourself a man or a woman. Now, you need the qualifier "cisgender". A standard definition of "cisgender" is "a person whose identity corresponds with the gender they were assigned at birth".
To a normal person, this seems very cringey. "The Earth is flat" is a more logical statement. And I do mean that. "The Earth is flat" is a demonstrably incorrect statement, but "the Earth has been assigned round" is equally incorrect. Assignment carries implications of determination. As if, when someone is born, they are actually genderless, but a doctor decides, at random, whether they are male or female. But that's not how science works! When a child is born (and, with developing technology, even long before), their gender is declared by observation. If it has a penis, he's a male. If it has a vagina, she's a female. That's not assigning a gender, that's recognising it, even if, at some point in their future, these children fall into the tiny minority of people who do not like the gender they were actually assigned by God long before they were even conceived.
The same God who "made them male and female" from the beginning (Genesis 1:27; Matthew 19:4; Mark 10:6) also inspired scripture before the ink was even dry (2 Timothy 3:16-17; 2 Peter 1:19-21). This means that a written work is either scripture, or it is not. If it is scripture, no Church has the authority to say "this is not scripture". Similarly, if a work is not scripture, no Church can come along centuries later and say "this is scripture". To say otherwise is more problematic as to say one is "assigned" a gender at birth.
But this is exactly what the Catholic Church does! In an effort to defend its imaginary authority, the Catholic Church claims to have given the world the Bible! It is the Catholic Church, they claim, that compiled the list of scriptures that belong in the Bible. Even the New Catholic Encyclopedia, in its entry on the canon, confidently declares "According to Catholic doctrine, the proximate criterion of the biblical canon is the infallible decision of the Church."
The greatest irony here is that this same entry admits "This decision was not given until rather late in the history of the Church at the Council of Trent". Not, as modern apologists claim, at the Councils of Hippo, or Carthage. Trent. That is, between 1545 and 1563. This is when the Catholic Church committed the sin of transscripturism, declaring works that had long been held, even by Pope Gregory the Great, to be non-canonical, to actually be scripture.
Throughout history, writings followed the Biblical canon that were not actually seen as canon. Rather, men like Jerome, Athanasias, and many others, considered them ecclesiastical works. Good spiritual reading, particularly for newcomers to the faith, but not included among the known canon.
The early Church were not alone in considering these writings Apocryphal. Just as the early Church considered them useful reading, but rejected them as scripture, so also did the Jews reject them as scripture, but keep them as edifying works. This is why the ancient Jewish and modern Christian canons are virtually identical, save a few differences in arrangement.
This really matters. Aside from the obvious fact that the Catholic Church rushed to upgrade the Deuterocanon (meaning "second canon", which should tell you everything you need to know) to scriptural status in protest of the Reformation, the Jews actually have a genuine claim to authority. Jesus was not a Catholic, He was a Jew. His Apostles were not Catholics, they were Jews. The prophets, of course, were not Catholics. They. Were. Jews.
And so, Paul, one of the Jewish Messiah's Jewish Apostles, writes "What advantage then has the Jew, or what is the profit of circumcision? Much in every way! Chiefly because to them were committed the oracles of God." (Romans 3:1-2). On top of this, Christ Himself says, of the Pharisees, no less: "The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat. Therefore whatever they tell you to observe, that observe and do..." (Matthew 23:2-3). What were the scribes and Pharisees telling the Jews to observe at the time? The "Protestant" Old Testament canon. They didn't teach that Tobit was scripture. They didn't teach that Judith was scripture. These, they considered extra-canonical works. And this was not among the things Jesus rebuked them for.
By contrast, the evidence even within scripture suggests the New Testament, rather than requiring some council to come along 300 years later to authorise them, as if God requires Catholic permission to lead His people, the New Testament was both recognised, and gratefully received by the Church, even while its inspired authors were still breathing. Peter recognises Paul's works as scripture (2 Peter 3:16), and Paul recognises Luke (1 Timothy 5:18). Paul also gives thanks that the Thessalonians received the word of God, not as the word of men, but as it is: The word of God (1 Thessalonians 2:13).
The internal evidence alone shows us that the early Church did not need a council to even tell them what scripture was. In fact, complete, and relatively complete canonical lists existed long before the Catholic Church even claims they canonised scripture, including lists that reject the Catholic addition of the Deuterocanon.
Disputes about the canon did, unfortunately, arise. This is because the devil has sent out many false teachers from the beginning, and they brought with them many false books. The majority of these can be dismissed with a simple knowledge of history, as they are late developments. The Gospel of Thomas, for example, is a 3rd century forgery, written long after the real Thomas had died. But whereas most modern Christians can simply Google "when was the Gospel of Thomas written?", such was obviously not possible in 393 A.D. Thus, false books had to be dismissed, and a canonical list did need to be presented.
But aside from the fact the Catholic Church hadn't really evolved by this point, no Church determined the canon. In fact, one criteria used to determine if a book was canonical was whether or not it was already recognised as such. Much like the Thessalonians had received the word of God as the word of God, the question was whether or not these books had also been recognised by the Church.
We can compare this with the Catholic concept of Development of Doctrine. Invented by John Henry Newman, Development of Doctrine is an excuse for why, contrary to his other more famous assertion, Church history does not reveal a consistent stream of Catholic tradition for 1500 years until Satan gave birth to Martin Luther... Rather, we see a clear evolution of Catholicism from a local semi-Christian cult in Rome to a global toxic milkshake of Christianity and the various pagan religions it absorbed as it grew. Even the Papacy cannot be found in the early centuries of Church history, much less the modern canon.
We see, then, that although Catholicism is spiritually opposed to the LGBT ideology, they share the same structure. This is because they share the same father: Satan (John 8:44). Who else but Satan would seek to stop a man hearing from his God? Who, other than the devil, would impede the study of the word of the Holy One? Who but the father of lies would ask "did God really say?", when what God really said is there in black and white? The ancient serpent, seeking to exalt himself, also takes from what is Christ's and uses it to exalt his false prophets.
"Do not call anyone on earth your father", says Christ, "for One is your Father, He who is in heaven." (Matthew 23:9). "But the Holy Father is the successor of Peter", the children of the devil reply, and so naturally, you have no authority to interpret Christ's words as He says them. "Test all things; hold fast what is good.", says Paul (1 Thessalonians 5:21). "Don't you dare test us", reply Satan's ministers, "for we alone may interpret the scriptures." Is this the Church Christ founded? One that is so opposed to His words, they must keep it under lock and key to prevent you obeying it? One that is so blasphemous that it claims authority to add and remove scriptures at will? This is not the Church of Christ. This is a cult, demanding the suspension of your senses, the surrender of your Bible, and the possession of your very soul. In God's timing, the Catholic Church will be destroyed as every other false religion. As Lot fled Sodom, God's children should flee Catholicism, and never look back.