Protestantism's objections to the actions of the Church are disqualified by the Clean Hands doctrines. Much of the communication of Scripture in the preliterate cultures was done through sacred and religious art which was ruthlessly destroyed by the Protestant iconoclasts because it was not presented in a media acceptable to them or in a form that they could manage the interpretations. Reducing the liturgy to the equivalent of a lecture diminished Bible awareness, rather than increase it.
However, it must be noted that the Bible, the Sacred Scripture, forms only one portion of the Deposit of Faith and that Catholic education feels it necessary to address the entire deposit of Faith, which includes the Sacred Tradition, which Protestants completely dismiss.
Peace be with you
It wasn't "protestantism" that did the removing & destroying of icons. It was individuals that did those things.
If it works for Catholics in saying their church never sinned, only people in it have, then the same sets of rules & exceptions can be applied to protestant-ism.
Or is this yet another place where "special pleadings" need be appealed to, and applied only to one party --- to keep the Latin Church itself from being disqualified by "Clean Hands" doctrine which you mention?
In reality, meaning that ultimately Rome defines what is right and wrong, thus she herself cannot be wrong, yet regardless of your attempt to provide immunity for the Roman church, my stated fact remains that historically Rome did not overall encourage Bible literacy among the laity.
Looking at images can certainly convey truth, but Lord did not use art to rebuke the devil or establish His claims and open the disciples mind to art, (Lk. 24:44) and it was the Scriptures that the Lord and His apostles and disciples so abundantly referenced or alluded to when preaching. As was Paul's manner, (Acts 17:2) mainly to those who knew them, (Acts 2:14-36; 10:24-43;13:16-41; 18:28; 28) while appeal to natural revelation was first made for the ignorant, (Acts 14:15-17; 17:22-31) and along with supernatural attestation, making "the Gentiles obedient, by word and deed, through mighty signs and wonders, by the power of the Spirit of God," and sacrificial labor in love and holiness. (Rm. 15:18,19; 2Cor. 6:4-10)
And (ignoring the debate about graven images), the issue is not whether art can be used, but whether this and less knowledge is preferred over actual reading, and thus working to educate the masses in that most basic and blessed ability, and to read and be fluent in Scripture in the common tongue.
It is the latter that Rome often hindered rather than promoting overall, while later teaching revisionist Bible scholarship to millions.
ruthlessly destroyed by the Protestant iconoclasts because it was not presented in a media acceptable to them or in a form that they could manage the interpretations.
That reason is an interpretation, rather than anger against Rome and the idea that graven images were wrong, while in any case what angry peasants, etc. did it is irrelevant, unless you can show that this was and is a standard Protestant doctrine. It was torture and killing of that had papal sanction, and which worldly means early Prots also had to unlearn.