What is the difference between veneration and worship?

Scripture calls the virgin Mary highly favored and blessed among women, but to Roman Catholics Mary is much more. Special honor and veneration for the Virgin began in the early centuries of the Church and turned into what many evangelical Protestants believe is the pure and simple worship of Mary, which has finally reached the point of saying her role in Redemption is of equal importance with Christ's.

Catholics, however, have an answer for the "you worship Mary" charge by pointing out the different levels of worship used in the Catholic church: latria, adoration for the triune God alone; dulia, veneration due the angels and canonized saints; and hyperdulia, a category reserved for Mary alone in which she is given 'superveneration'.

In conclusion it was decreed that even as the figure on the cross was honoured, so images of the Saviour and blessed Virgin, of angels and of saints, whether painted or mosaic, or any other suitable material, are to be set up for kissing and honourable reverence (proskunesin); but not for real worship (latreian) which belongs to divine nature alone. Incense and lights are to be offered to them, as to the cross, the Gospels, and other holy memorials; "forasmuch as the honour paid to the image passes on to the original, and he who adores an image, adores in it the person of him whom it represents."

The veneration that was paid in the early ages of Christianity to those who had faithfully witnessed and suffered for Christ, no doubt led to the practice of invoking the saints, and imploring the benefit of their intercession. A pardonable affection became a superstitious veneration, and ended in a positive adoration. The step between veneration and adoration is easy and natural, though not always observable. Hence the importance of the apostle's warning, "Little children, keep yourselves from idols." According to this word it would appear, that all who have not the Person of Christ before them, as the one all-governing object of the heart have an idol. The apostle has just been speaking of our wondrous place and blessing in Him; as he says, "We are in Him that is true, even in His Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God and eternal life." Having eternal life in Him, and being identified with Him as to our position before God, surely He ought to be our one object. Any other is an idol. And the best of Christians are in danger of paying too much homage to some favourite teacher or leader. How will all this compare with John's epistle in the last great day? The Lord keep us from undue veneration for the creature, whether living or dead!

We have rendered the Greek word προσκυνέω, by "do homage"; this expression applying in Greek to every kind of reverential action, from the simple act of bowing to a superior up to the adoration of God Himself. The reader will easily decide on the character of the homage, by considering who the person is to whom it is rendered, and who it is that renders it.

Romanists tell us this is hyperdulia, that is, worship of a very high order, but short of Latria, worship to God alone, but higher than Dulia, a lower sort of worship accorded to saints and angels. But worship is sternly forbidden to all but God alone. The worshipping of angels is forbidden, the intruding into those things we have not seen (See Col. 2:18).

The scene described exactly presents the meaning of the Bible word basic to our theme, proskuneo. Its simple original meaning is to prostrate oneself before another, and for the purpose of this study we shall use the English word worship as the exact equivalent of the New Testament word proskuneo. Perhaps the Hebrew word used in the Old Testament had primary reference to the bodily attitude described, but in the setting of John 4 we may simply begin with the thought that worship is an attitude of spirit, taken by man realising the presence of God revealed. In the true worship in spirit and in truth, the worship of the Father, warm and living overtones of love and relationship are added to this basic thought, but here is our beginning, a concept which clearly differentiates worship from thanksgiving, praise, prayer, or service, but indicates also how closely related are each of these actions. We can thank, praise, or serve an equal, but worship is due to God alone. When we do thank, praise, or serve Him, while there is in these actions addressed to God an element of recognising His greatness and awful glory, this element is not the central purpose and content of these actions as it is in the case of worship.

Perhaps at this point reference should be made to those minor and subsidiary cases in which worship is addressed to men. In addressing the mayor as "Your Worship", we know very well that worship belongs to God alone. This is a minor, archaic, and exceptional usage. So it is in Scripture. Those cases in which it is doubtful whether the speaker in the Gospels really intended to attribute deity to Jesus are examples of this kind. In the parable of the two debtors, the first debtor "fell down and worshipped" the king. Here the expression is evidently equivalent to "did homage". The full New Testament significance is clear in the last chapter of the Revelation. John is twice moved to fall down and worship the angel who explained to him the vision. He is quite sternly forbidden, and the angel's injunction "Worship God" obviously means that worship is due to God alone.

The commonest of Greek and English Lexicons to the New Testament, such as Rose's Parkhurst, is clear that proskuneo expresses homage whether civil or religious (i.e., reverence, and worship). The following note Mr. R. gives from Dr. J. P. Smith's Scripture Testimony to the Messiah (ii., p. 270): "This word occurs sixty times in the New Testament. Two, without controversy, denote civil homage (Matt. 18:26; Rev. 3:9); fifteen refer to idolatrous rites (John 4:22; Acts 7:42 [?], 43; Rev. 9:10 [? 20]; Rev. 13:4, 8, 12, 15; Rev. 14:9, 11; Rev. 16:2; Rev. 19:20; Rev. 20:4); three, to mistaken and disapproved homage to creatures (Acts 10:25; Rev. 19:10; Rev. 22:8); about twenty-five clearly respect the homage due to the most high God; and the remainder relate to acts of homage to Jesus Christ. Of these (Matt. 2:2, 8, 11; Matt. 8:2; Matt. 9:18; Matt. 14:33; Matt. 15:25; Matt. 20:20; Matt. 28:9, 17; Mark 5:6; Mark 6:51 [? xv. 19]; 5: [? 4:] 8 [Luke 24:52]), though some of them (marked ) denote a very deep and awful reverence, it cannot be said that any necessarily denote the worship due to God. But John 20:28 and Heb. 1:6, especially the last, against which no objection can be raised, are of a different order." — Note from the ed. of 1829. There must be some oversight as elsewhere in citing John 20:28, for the word is not there, though Thomas' emphatic address did pay divine honour to the Lord. But the passage demonstrates the absurdity of such as limit pr. to divine worship. Mr. D.'s version very properly applies it in both senses to our Lord. So Dean Alford, Mr. T. S. Green, Dr. G. Campbell (on the Gospels), Doddridge, and (one may say) every intelligent Christian.

What crowns the character of the present assault is the fact that, in a recent version of the New Testament by a learned and able Unitarian (Mr. S. Sharpe), pr. is habitually, indeed invariably, translated "worship," applied to God, our Lord, and the creature, whether in civil reverence or in religious worship. On the other hand I am not aware of a single orthodox Christian of competent biblical knowledge who would not in the main support the discriminating value given to pr. in J. N. D.'s version as against either the Authorized Version or Mr. Sharpe. We might generally translate proskuneo as "doing homage;" because this would embrace reverence both civil and religious. But it is an error in the present usage of the English language to translate it always as "worship," because in perhaps a majority of its occurrences in the New Testament this is not the true sense. The principle therefore on which Mr. D.'s version goes is undoubtedly sound, whereas the Authorized Version (perhaps through some change in the use of the verb "worship" as compared with its wider bearing two or three hundred years ago) is incorrect. The substantive and adjective are still applied as a title of respect to certain authorities. But the usage of the verb, as it often occurs in the New Testament, is now obsolete.

Similar memorials of the Saviour, the Virgin Mary, the inspired Apostles, and the Fathers, were found. The most sacred relics that had been concealed for centuries were now discovered by visions. So great, so successful, was the delusion of the enemy, that the whole church fell into the snare. From the age of Constantine till the epoch of the Arab invasion, a veneration for images, pictures and relics gradually increased. The reverence for relics was more characteristic of the Western, and that for images of the Eastern churches; but from the time of Gregory the Great the feeling of the West became more favourable to images. In consequence of the almost total decay of literature, both among the clergy and the laity, the use of images was found to give immense power to the priesthood. Pictures, statues, and visible representations of sacred objects became the readiest mode of conveying instruction, encouraging devotion, and strengthening religious sentiments in the minds of the people. The more intellectual or enlightened of the clergy might endeavour to maintain the distinction between respect for images as a means and not as objects of worship. But the undiscriminating devotion of the vulgar utterly disregards these subtleties. The apologist may draw fine distinctions between images as objects of reverence and as objects of adoration, but there can be no doubt that with ignorant and superstitious minds the use, the reverence, the worship of images, whether in pictures or statues, invariably degenerates into idolatry.

We thus see how the worship of images was solemnly ordained in a council of the church. It is in vain that we are now told that images are not worshipped. An image was adored in the council itself, and the council itself declared that the veneration paid to an image passed to the person represented. Alas, that scripture should be thus utterly rejected, and men's thoughts set up in place thereof. We also see to how low a standard that which is called worship had fallen in those days. It could be given to a picture of our Lord, or even to one of the saints!

The reader will be interested to learn that the word chosen by the council to designate the sort of worship to be given to images is the word used in Matthew 4:10: "Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve." It is also used in John 4, when our Lord was speaking to the woman of Samaria. Also in Revelation 19:10: "Worship God;" and in other places.

It can easily be imagined, that if people, ignorant of the scripture, believed all these things, it would be almost natural that they should pay the highest respect to such images and pictures; and that this respect should gradually merge into veneration and worship. Various things were calculated to encourage this: such as burning lights before them, offering incense in honour of them, adorning them with gems and precious metals. Hands were also placed on them when oaths were taken, and they were even employed as sponsors in baptism! To fall down and reverence them, and then to pray to them naturally followed.

We can well believe that many Christians must and did disagree with all this, and many and severe were the conflicts as to the question of images and their worship. It will be seen that, while the above honours were paid to the images, it was perfectly vain to profess that no worship was intended.