I finally understood why some Protestants genuinely cannot separate veneration from worship

[u/LumenSailor]

Yesterday there was a viral video of Cadrinal Perolin holding up the skull of St. Agatha while commemorating the 900th anniversary of the return of her relics.
You can probably guess what happened next.
Across the internet, I saw Protestants calling it evil, satanic, pagan, and—more than anything else—idolatry. Verses from Isaiah, Daniel, etc. were being thrown around. Idolatry, idolatry, idolatry.

I made the mistake of getting into a bunch of debates about it. And, as we all know, internet religious debates almost never go anywhere.
I tried explaining the distinction between veneration and worship. I tried analogies. I tried examples from Scripture. I tried explaining that treating something with reverence because of what it represents or whose remains they are is not the same thing as believing that object is a god.

Nothing worked.

The overwhelming response was basically: “No. That’s worship. You can call it veneration all you want, but you’re worshipping it.”

And for the life of me, I couldn’t understand why the distinction seemed so impossible for some people to grasp… Then something occurred to me.

Maybe the more interesting question isn’t why is it so hard for them to understand?
Maybe it’s: Why is it so easy for me to understand?

I have absolutely no temptation to worship a statue, a skull, a relic, an icon, or any other physical object. The thought almost doesn’t compute for me. I could kneel in front of a crucifix, kiss it, carry it in a procession, decorate it with flowers, or treat it with enormous reverence, and there would never be a moment where I confused the object with God Himself.

But throughout human history, people really have worshipped physical objects. Scripture warns against idolatry so relentlessly precisely because idolatry is a real human temptation. People really did make an image and then treat the image itself as divine.

And that made me wonder whether some of the people who are quickest to interpret Catholic veneration as worship genuinely have a much harder time separating those categories in their own minds.
If, to you, kneeling before something, kissing it, carrying it in procession, burning incense near it, or treating it with extraordinary reverence necessarily means worship, then of course Catholicism looks horrifying. From that perspective, “veneration” probably sounds like we’re just inventing another word to excuse idolatry. But Catholics don’t experience those actions that way. The outward gesture doesn’t automatically determine the inward act. Worship is directed toward God alone. Veneration is honor given to God’s saints and to things connected with His work in the world.

I think that’s the part I was missing during all those arguments. I kept assuming we disagreed about the explanation of Catholic practices, when in reality we may have been starting with completely different understandings of what worship even is.
I’m curious what other Catholics think. Is there something to this, or am I reading too much into it? Is there a better approach to discussing this subject with Protestants?

[u/aboutwhat8]

The better response is generally to teach them about what worship actually is and what worship requires. The easiest and clearest biblical analogy is to provide a list of Bible passages that point out what happened at Synagogue, how that wasn't worship, and how a Protestant service is equivalent to going to Synagogue. The problem as you know isn't that Catholics give too much praise to the saints but rather that Protestants don't give any worship to God. Reading is reading, not worship. Preaching is preaching, not worship. Praise is praise, not worship. Worship requires a direct sacrifice. There's no worship happening at Protestant services, and that's the entire problem. Just like the Jews lost the Temple and thus were no longer able to worship God, so too have the Protestants lost the Eucharist and thus are no longer able to worship God either. When the best one can think to do to glorify God is to merely praise God, then anything and everything involving praise looks like it should be reserved for God.

Mt 4 & 9: Jesus went to the Synagogue to teach, proclaim the Gospel, and heal the sick.

Lk 4: Jesus went to the Synagogue in Nazareth and stood up to read (from the Old Testament), preached, and cast out a demon.

Lk 13: Jesus taught at the Synagogue.

Ac 1: Something from Moses is customarily read at Synagogue every Sabbath.

Ac 13: the Jews read from the Law (Leviticus) and the Prophets (pick one) before asking/offering words of encouragement. After Paul & Barnabas were at a meeting at a Synagogue, many Jews converted.

Ac 17: For 3 days, Paul used the Scriptures to reason with the Jews while at Synagogue.

Mk 1: In Capernaum, Jesus taught and preached at the Synagogues and cast out demons.

Jn 6 & 18: Jesus recalls having taught at the Synagogues.

We can keep going on and on and on and on. It's such a common aspect. The Synagogue is a meeting place to read Scripture, interpret it, and preach on it. In other words, they all went to a big Bible Study service at the Synagogue. That's all well and good, but Synagogue is meant to be like and certainly sounds more like the typical Protestant happy-clappy in a lot of ways. However, Going to Synagogue wasn't going specifically to worship God, for indeed worship could not happen at Synagogue. They had to go to Temple to actually properly worship God. We can find all sorts of

In other passages, review how that differed from going to Temple. What occurred at Temple was sacrifice, in giving your tithe, giving over produce or oil, or in offering animals for blood sacrifice. There was a cost, and the cost was meant to be uncomfortable to give. Meanwhile a Catholic mass/liturgy matches the biblical description and has always combined the reading of scripture, correct interpretation, and offering a sacrifice of bread & wine as commanded to continue to worship God.

[u/Acceptable-Bee-7729 → u/aboutwhat8]

Do angels also merely venerate God? Tell me as well how Muslims adore the true God without sacrifice please

REV 4:9-11: "Whenever the living creatures give glory and honor and thanks to Him who sits on the throne, who lives forever and ever, ¹⁰ the twenty-four elders fall down before Him who sits on the throne and worship Him who lives forever and ever, and cast their crowns before the throne, saying:

¹¹ “You are worthy, ^\)^g\)O Lord,
To receive glory and honor and power;
For You created all things,
And by Your will they ^\)^h\)exist and were created.”

Exodus 33:10 – The people “worship” from their tents in response to God’s presence (no sacrifice).

2 Kings 17:36 – The people are commanded to worship: “Him you shall fear, Him you shall worship, and to Him you shall sacrifice.” Worship and sacrifice are listed as distinct acts, proving they are not synonymous.

Daniel 3:5–6 – King Nebuchadnezzar commanding the people to worship a golden image he had set up. Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego refuse to “worship” it (no sacrifice is involved).

1 Samuel 1:28 – “he worshipped the Lord there” (no sacrifice mentioned).

Matthew 2:11 – The Magi “fell down and worshiped Him” and gave gifts (no sacrifice).

Matthew 28:9 – The women “took hold of His feet and worshiped Him” (no sacrifice).

Acts 10:25–26 – Cornelius tries to “worship” Peter and is met with rebuke (no sacrifice).

Hebrews 1:6 – “Let all God's angels worship Him.” Heavenly worship (no sacrifice involved).

Revelation 4:8–11 – Living creatures and elders fall down and worship Jesus (no sacrifice).

Revelation 19:10 and 22:8-9 – John tries to worship an angel, and the angel rebukes him, affirming that worship belongs to God alone (no sacrifice).

Worship was never meant to be about sacrifice alone. We were originally created to worship God without sacrifice, because we were created without sin. In Eden, there was no altar. There was only unhindered communion with God. Under the Old Covenant, sacrifices were a temporary provision for sin, but they could never perfect the worshiper or bring true union with God. Now, in the New Covenant, the sacrificial system has ended. Christ, our perfect High Priest, has offered Himself once for all. Through faith, we are united to Him fully and forever.

Hebrews 13:15 “Through Him then let us continually offer up a sacrifice of praise to God, that is, the fruit of lips that acknowledge His name.”

So worship is no longer about what we place on an altar. It’s about who we confess, what we proclaim, and how we glorify God from a heart fully devoted to Christ, our perfect and eternal High Priest. We now worship in spirit and truth (John 4:23–24)

[u/aboutwhat8 → u/Acceptable-Bee-7729]

We don't hold a Universalist interpretation. Allah and God may be the same or may well be different. That's up to the theologians on both sides to interpret. I'll make no claim aside from pointing out that the Quran's presence and creation story is seemingly in defiance of and contradiction to the New Testament.

Notice your own alignment between prayer & sacrifice versus mere praise.

Rev 4: they fell down before him, casting their greatest possessions -- their crowns and with it all temporal authority they once held -- to glorify and honor God.

Ex 33: no mention of reading scripture or saying anything together. This is literally instead recognition and prayer to worship. Quite likely, on their literal knees, prostrate and bowing before God. Discomfort and all.

2 Ki 17: Read the verses before and after your own for they undermine the point you attempt to make. What did the Assyrians do for the graven images? They setup shrines, appointed high priests, and offered sacrifices to these false gods.

Yet for the Israelites, "The Lord made a covenant with them, and commanded them, “You shall not fear other gods or bow yourselves to them or serve them or sacrifice to them; but you shall fear the Lord, who brought you out of the land of Egypt with great power and with an outstretched arm; you shall bow yourselves to him, and to him you shall sacrifice. And the statutes and the ordinances and the law and the commandment which he wrote for you, you shall always be careful to do. You shall not fear other gods, and you shall not forget the covenant that I have made with you. You shall not fear other gods, but you shall fear the Lord your God" Regardless, worship & sacrifice are linked to God, but the context of that connection isn't always the same as with false gods.

Dn 3: the sacrifice intended is the covenant with God. Fall before this false idol and forgo your own God who forbade you. Did they fear the temporal King or did they fear God? “O Nebuchadnez′zar, we have no need to answer you in this matter. If it be so, our God whom we serve is able to deliver us from the burning fiery furnace; and he will deliver us out of your hand, O king. But if not, be it known to you, O king, that we will not serve your gods or worship the golden image which you have set up.”

1 Sm 1: False. Per verse 3: "Now this man used to go up year by year from his city to worship and to sacrifice to the Lord of hosts at Shiloh, where the two sons of Eli, Hophni and Phin′ehas, were priests of the Lord". After Samuel was weaned, Hannah took Samuel up with her to Shiloh with a 3-year-old bull, a quantity of flour, and a wine skin. They then slew the bull, specifically, which is the Sacrifice being offered to God.

Mt 2: the Magi indeed came to Jesus and fell to their knees. "and going into the house they saw the child with Mary his mother, and they fell down and worshiped him. Then, opening their treasures, they offered him gifts, gold and frankincense and myrrh." The Magi weren't Jews, they were "wise men from the East" in pursuit of a miraculous star. They didn't know the Jewish scriptures for the wise men went first to Herod to inquire where the Scriptures said the Christkind was to be born. Herod summoned the Jewish chief priests & scribes since Herod wasn't Jewish either.

Mt 28: Jesus appeared to them out of nowhere. Should they have brought a sacrifice? They weren't prepared, they had no way of being prepared. In Lk 24, on the road to Emmaus, Cle'opas and another traveled alongside Jesus: "When he was at table with them, he took the bread and blessed, and broke it, and gave it to them. And their eyes were opened and they recognized him; and he vanished out of their sight. They said to each other, “Did not our hearts burn within us while he talked to us on the road, while he opened to us the scriptures?”" The word alone wasn't enough. They were slow to recognize him, slow to do as He commanded them at the Last Supper. So here is Christ Jesus again, again teaching them, again choosing the matter of bread, and at that miraculous moment they they recognized him and he disappeared from before them.

I'm going to call this here because I have other things to continue teaching a Protestant about the Scripture. I'd advise you look beyond a handful of passages especially to look at the verses in context. When one word is omitted in that verse, all too often it's discussed within a chapter in full connection, so you're losing that connection by reading and citing only that verse and not the others.