I have read your first two posts and I don't see anything to disagree with. Of course I would clarify that by "intellect" I do not subscribe to scholasticism which has such a deep and strong place of honor in the West. I read the CCC probably a decade ago. Do you plan to go through it all?
something on a related thread got me thinking:
Absolutely meaningless exercise.
I have had more than one occaison where I have shown to a person how the CCC is incorrect from an historical and/or theological perspective, and for any die hard Catholic apologist their last desparate response is:
"So what? The CCC is not a reliable source of Catholic teaching anyway!"
Fr. Ambrose has repeatedly brought up, for instance the Orthodox belief in the Assumption, how we manage with no conecept of Magisterium, decrees of theological certitude and dogmatic statements for the sake of dogmatic statements (the last a product of scholasticism, which led to the other two in the Counter-Reformation):the Faith is a package deal. It can't be reduced to checklist of dogma. The Orthodox phronema, mindset, stands in antithesis to the confessionalism which has been cultivated by the Vatican.
That comes into play, therefore, in all manners.
The reason why the OO and EO mergers have not happened, although the theologians have approved the documents is that like us, the OO are not "confessional," and the "whole packages" have yet to be combined (a problem is that there are EO Churches with no real contact with the OO).
It is also why if Met. Zizoulas gets any signatures on his union of Ravenna/Crete/Cyprus, it will not be worth the paper it is on. It is also why, even if the Pope of Rome confessed the Orthodox Faith, there is the question of whether he would be first: the mind whold have to be cleared to acquire the Orthodox mindset. It is what the EP, in saner days, refered to the ontological difference that had arisen between us and the Vatican.
It is why many Orthodox suspect many converts, because conversion is not agreeing to a wish list of beliefs as a contract, but rather the renouncing of old selected heretical beliefs and the embracing of enumberated dogmas and the Church in general is a symbolic act of accepting the whole, a spiritual merism.
I myself came in as a quia confessional Lutheran, not really believing, for instance the perpetual virginity of the Holy Theotokos or her assumption. After a period of being absorbed into the Church, rather than trying to absorb it, not believing such things simply ceased to make sense. No "assent of the will, full assent of faith, etc." needed.
So why bother with the CCC? Because it a reliable source of the Vatican's teaching