When, theologically, does veneration become idolatry? A few questions:

[TheReturnofLive]

This is a serious inquiry. I ask for individuals who are strong in their Faith in Christ to come forward and answer these questions. I do not mean to scandalize anyone or threaten the Faith of anyone, so if you feel you are just learning about Catholicism or are weak in your Faith, LEAVE THIS THREAD. I do not wish to scandalize anyone with this tough inquiry. I do not wish to "troll" like some people like to accuse me of (and if you do so in this thread, I will ignore you).

but these are some deep-rooted questions I've had for a long time in my life, but never really could adequately express. If you wish to proceed, here we go.








The Protestant uneasiness with the Catholic use of artwork and veneration of Saints, images, and relics, viewing such acts as possible idolatry is well understood, given the fact that this issue has not only repeatedly come up in Christian theological history as such a contestable issue (see the Apocryphal Acts of John [where Saint John allegedly rebukes a disciple for idolatry for making an altar to himself [John] and explains that true beauty comes from virtue, not pictures], the Council of Toledo [which forbids Spanish Churches from having paintings on the walls], or the Seventh Ecumenical Council and it's counterpart "false Seventh Ecumenical Council" [where the theology of icons were sharply contested and debated, with many concerns for idolatry]), but also because an accurate way to sum up the Old Testament is as God telling the Israelites to not make graven images to worship false gods, and the Israelites doing so anyways.

The line of logic for Catholic gestures towards sacred images, relics, (including praying with, kissing, touching, and prostrating / posturing to sacred images), as I understand, is four-fold:
1. The images / relics in of themselves aren't supernatural or powerful, and aren't real representations / incarnations of the Saints; neither do they represent some kind of power in of themselves of the Saints.
2. If an image / relic does have a supernatural or powerful use, it is done through God alone
3. The veneration is an "inferior" type of worship; adoration goes to God alone.
4. The veneration is more of an honor to the virtues and life in what the Saint represents, and a recognition that their life is one worth following to get to Heaven.


However, I see some grounds for potential confusion that makes the line between idolatry and veneration all the more thin:


For 3 and 4:

What about images of Jesus Christ Himself? When one venerates an image of Christ, is it only an honor of His life, or is the prohibition on the Old Testament making of images for God lifted, now that
God is made comprehensible through the God-man Jesus Christ. When we venerate an image of Christ, are we only honoring the virtues of his life, or are we adoring God directly through veneration of the image?

Also, what about images of God the Father depicted as "The Ancient of Days" - you know the one, the one with the gray beard, typically depicted with a triangular halo?

For 1:

Most pagan religions that exist today don't claim that their idols are literal gods, or that the idols are necessarily even accurate depictions of their gods. Rather, the honor paid to an idol goes directly to the gods through the image itself.

As some examples:

Jainism
https://www.storiesbyarpit.com/2019/08/sculpting-tirthankars-q-on-jain.html

Shintoism:
https://thekojiki.wordpress.com/2015/12/30/shinto-and-idolatry/


For 3:

Some pagan religions directly reject the idea of even adoring / worshipping a god as an end in of itself, compared to Monotheistic religions or other pagan religions; they see such practices as morally wrong; yet they still use idols to honor the figures represent and seeking blessings / benefits from the idols.

Examples:

Daoism
https://www.enotes.com/homework-help/how-and-where-do-taoists-worship-343929

Buddhism
https://medium.com/@billyhalim/do-buddhists-worship-buddha-statue-93845d9c3104



So, with all that being said:

What makes idolatry harmful compared to veneration?

Is it the falseness of the gods / deities (that is, the theology / gods the pagans use are a distortion of there being Only One God)? If so, what about schismatic sects that venerate heretics as canonized Saints, and even Catholics who venerate the same?

Is it the adoration of the images rather than veneration, which we can only give to the incomprehensible God? If so, what about pagans who don't adore pagan deities as an end in of themselves, but still give honor to the pagan deities as a means to an end (Daoism, Buddhism)? Are such pagans idolators? And what about Catholics who adore Christ / God the Father through depictions of them?

Is it the fact that the Saints aren't proclaimed to be deities, and that any honor paid to them is known directly to go to God? Then what about depictions of Christ, God the Father?

[orate]

A Catholic does not venerate the image nor attribute any kind of power to the object itself.  A Catholic uses the image to raise his heart and mind to saint/BVM/Christ in prayer.

We are creatures of both body and soul.  Our bodies are senate so we use our eyes, ears, nose, mouth and skin in the service of our prayers, to lift us up to God and venerate the holiness of the saints.

That's it, pure and simple.

What other religions believe has no bearing on Catholic belief.  And no true Catholic attributes to an object, that which belongs to God alone.

[Jayne]

What other religions believe has no bearing on Catholic belief. 

Exactly. Trying to understand Catholicism by comparing it to false religions is a dangerous approach.  It is much more likely to lead to confusion than to better understanding.

[St.Justin]

(Greek doulia; Latin servitus), a theological term signifying the honour paid to the saints, while latria means worship given to God alone, and hyperdulia the veneration offered to the Blessed Virgin Mary. St. Augustine (City of God X.2) distinguishes two kinds of servitus: "one which is due to men . . . which in Greek is called dulia; the other, latria, which is the service pertaining to the worship of God". St. Thomas (II-II:103:3) bases the distinction on the difference between God's supreme dominion and that which one man may exercise over another. Catholic theologians insist that the difference is one of kind and not merely of degree; dulia and latria being as far apart as are the creature and the Creator. Leibniz, though a Protestant, recognizes the "discrimen infinitum atque immensum between the honour which is due to God and that which is shown to the saints, the one being called by theologians, after Augustine's example, latria, the other dulia"; and he further declares that this difference should "not only be inculcated in the minds of hearers and learners, but should also be manifested as far as possible by outward signs" (Syst. theol., p. 184). A further distinction is made between dulia in the absolute sense, the honour paid to persons, and dulia in the relative sense, the honour paid to inanimate objects, such as images and relics. With regard to the saints, dulia includes veneration and invocation; the former being the honour paid directly to them, the latter having primarily in view the petitioner's advantage.

The difference is really how the person views the object. If we see it as god then it is idol worship. If we see it as not Divine and are just showing veneration then no problem.

Read this carefully and understand what it is really saying:

2 I am the Lord thy God, who brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. Thou shalt not have strange gods before me. Thou shalt not make to thyself a graven thing, nor the likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or in the earth beneath, nor of those things that are in the waters under the earth. Thou shalt not adore them, nor serve them:

It is ALL talking about false gods and things that represent them and nothing else
So provided you are not using something to represent or be a god, no problem.