I don’t submit to the Novus Ordo rhetoric of the “Catechism of the Catholic Church”. I studied “The Baltimore Catechism”.
And you’re one to talk, you’re not even Catholic so please keep your non-solicited opinions to yourself.
Discussion over. Have a nice day.
If you studied it, then you must recall 222 which says "We honor Christ and the saints when we pray before the crucifix, relics, and sacred images because we honor the persons they represent; we adore Christ and venerate the saints".
The Council of Trent states "Moreover, that the images of Christ, of the Virgin Mother of God, and of the other saints, are to be had and retained particularly in temples, and that due honour and veneration are to be given them...but because the honour which is shown them is referred to the prototypes which those images represent; in such wise that by the images which we kiss, and before which we uncover the head, and prostrate ourselves, we adore Christ; and we venerate the saints, whose similitude they bear: as, by the decrees of Councils, and especially of the second Synod of Nicaea, has been defined against the opponents of images." [Council of Trent, Session XXV]
Or is this not Catholic enough for you? It is clear that the Catholic Church venerated statues and holy images (icons) all along.
And you’re one to talk, you’re not even Catholic so please keep your non-solicited opinions to yourself. Discussion [sic] over
Whether I am Catholic or not is irrelevant. What's relevant is that, by all accounts, you don't know the Church's history and teaching or otherwise you would not have written what you have written regarding venerating icons and depicting God the Father as a human being.
Rather, as MarkBsnr observed, you seem to be making your own church...and rules.
As for my opinions, this is an open forum, and opinions are welcome, and I intend to comment on what find worth commenting on, with or without your "permission."
As for my comments/opinions not being solicited, perhaps you need to be reminded that you volunteered to make a non-solicited comment showing God the Father in human form (Post #46 addressed to stafassisi, not you), which was patently false if not naïve, and then another comment about venerating icons being something the Eastern Orthodox do but not Catholics, which is patently false.
Both of your comments run counter to Church doctrine and teaching going back to the the 7th Ecumenical Council, and earlier.
Trouble is, you claim the discussion is over and I ask what "discussion?" So far, you have stated two doctrinal blunders but you have not provided any reference, any evidence, any quote, anything, to support any of your unsolicited claims.