Distinguishing Between Latria and Veneration

[Wm777]

Am trying to distinguish what the difference between Latria (worship due God alone) is compared to other modes of piety, such as Doulia (veneration in the service of other Saintly souls), and Hyperdoulia (veneration in the service of Our Lady).

Anything could be helpful, I guess, but I think I’m looking for some sort of trace evidence to distinguish between them.

For instance, suppose you were a Brother in an order, and you had to obey the Rule of St N… How would one know if one was obeying out of worship to God (latria) versus when one was obeying out of veneration for St N (doulia)?

I do NOT want this thread to enter into any arguments concerning possible modes of spiritual heresy… like if you were serving St N’s Rule (doulia) or the Blessed Mother (hyperdoulia) you would somehow be contradicting latria… We believe in the Communion of the Saints, and the church has already approved the Rules of various orders, so - if you do not agree with one rule or another - please don’t waste time arguing about whether or not you approve of or agree with a specific rule or order… or even if you agree with the whole distinction between latria and doulia… Also, what I am seeking here is also not a question of differences between charisms, if such a difference can be avoided…

Somehow the church formed a distinction between latria and doulia, and I think that is the difference I’m looking to identify… There must be some distinct differentiators between the worship due God versus the love and respect due our brethren… and that is what I’m trying to identify…

I hope this makes sense. Please let me know if it needs clarification, but I think this is the best I’ve been able to articulate the question.

 

[anon91549587]

I was just thinking about this today. Sometimes i have to establish boundaries within myself so as not to take veneration too far.

 

[Wm777]

I was just thinking about this today. Sometimes i have to establish boundaries within myself so as not to take veneration too far.

Again, while I appreciate your concern, please keep the conversation on track.

If it helps, I’ll clarify.

The question here is not one of the significance of “why” when distinguishing between latria and doulia.

The question is more about “how” the church distinguished between latria and doulia.

If people start discussing “why”, it’s likely the “how” will be missed because dissenting people will start arguing over the credibility of the entire practice of communing with the Saints.

The extent to which one goes in venerating a Saint is a topic for a different thread.

The church’s policies in the communion of the Saints has been established. That is enough for the scope of this question.

The point is - how did they draw the distinction?

In reflection of what I wrote earlier, Im thinking it might have something to do with the difference between Creator and creature.

We can’t always expect Creatures to do what our Creator can.

That at least seems to be a beginning.

 

[Maathw]

Yeah me too I get confused on distinguishing latria,hyperdulia, and dulia.
Sometimes I think that is it not that the Rosary is for Mary so it is a hyperdulia. But then I think that the Rosary is also said for Saints so it also is a dulia. Eh its very difficult

 

[mrsdizzyd]

I think, in a certain way, his response was on track. The distinction between the two can sometimes be interior. There are obvious differences, such as the use of creator language or salvation themes in latria vs. doulia. But, if you consider the flowery language St. Louis de Montfort used in reference to Mary, there are many who would say that it sounds like latria. However, we know it is not. Interiorly, St. Louis would never give latria to Mary. I’d imagine the same would be true for any who do his Marian Consecration.

 

[Wm777]

It stands to reason that - if one person can and should go “all out” for God, then two people can and should do the same.

What seems to happen is, however, when we go to coordinate our efforts - our mortality catches up with us. Sins can trip us up.

From what is said so far, latria is more inwardly oriented, but doulia is more externally oriented.
That might mean latria parallels the 1st commandment, whereas doulia parallels the 2nd commandment.

If that is so, then latria is between God and an individual; whereas doulia is between God and humanity - all in social relation to one another.

There will be sins possible either way on a motral’s behalf.

It’s just the more people one throws in - it seems to have a multiplicative effect.

But, while that is possible, the rules of an order are aimed at leading souls back to God; and, where sin abounds, grace abounds all the more.

Thus, the conclusion I’m drawing is, forgiveness - in its fullest sense is probably given its greastest opportunity in a full community of kindred spirits.

 

[Isearch]

Latria involves offering a sacrifice while dulia does not. This means that the worship due to God alone is qualitatively different from the hyper-veneration due to the Blessed Virgin.

 

[TheLittleLady]

Think of it in the language of love.

You find your grandparents’ love letters in the attic. Your grandfather writes to your grandmother “I adore you, I worship the ground on which you walk! Your beauty is like the morning sun on my parched soul.”

Would you think that grandpa was committing idolatry? No, you would think that they were so sweet with each other.

 

[Wm777]

That’s an interesting response.

Can you elaborate, please?

I don’t think we can help but make sacrifices in order to get along. For what you say to be true, the entire field of economics would have to dismissed…

But what does makes sense is - it sounds like you are saying the latria worship sacrifice has a unique quality that the doulia sacrifice does not.

So what is the difference? That question is in line with and a paraphrase of what I’ve been asking all along.

 

[Isearch]

Sacrifice involves a real physical gift being offered: the ancient pagans had their bulls, ancient Jews had their grains and spotless lambs, and Christians have the Eucharist. Not only is the gift merely being offered, but the gift must have a real change: the pagans slay their bulls; the ancient Jews burned their offerings; and the Christians either have the change of the bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Christ or the fact that the Christians have to consume the Eucharist, thus changing the offerings into parts of your bodies. The only difference between Christian priests and the Jewish and pagan priests is that Christian priests don’t have to be butchers of animals.

 

[Isearch]

This has been the traditional understanding as to how latria and dulia physically differ.

 

[JerryZ]

Latria or adoration most important distinction is that we offer sacrifice to GOD alone.
We do not offer any type of sacrifices to any of the other types of honor we give saints or even alive people.
Kings for example want to receive Dulia, Which translates as Honor. In old English it was customary to address the King as “Your Worship”. But no one offered sacrifices to the Kings of old.
Hyperdulia is just that “super honor”. Again no sacrifices offered.
Once we clearly understand this very important difference then we can remove those fears of “breaking the commandments”. Which the Church founded by Jesus certainly will not entice any one to do.
Hope this helps.

 

[Unique_name]

Can you please help clarify this for me? I got into a debate with some Protestants the other day and they brought this up.

23 Now there have been many of those priests, since death prevented them from continuing in office; 24 but because Jesus lives forever, he has a permanent priesthood. 25 Therefore he is able to save completely[c] those who come to God through him, because he always lives to intercede for them.

26 Such a high priest truly meets our need—one who is holy, blameless, pure, set apart from sinners, exalted above the heavens. 27 Unlike the other high priests, he does not need to offer sacrifices day after day, first for his own sins, and then for the sins of the people. He sacrificed for their sins once for all when he offered himself. 28 For the law appoints as high priests men in all their weakness; but the oath, which came after the law, appointed the Son, who has been made perfect forever.

 

[Wm777]

This has been the traditional understanding as to how latria and dulia physically differ.

Thank you! That was very helpful.

I’m still reading through it to try to comprehend it, but it seems to be credible literature and sort of makes sense.

What seems most distinct is the notion of “real change” in the sacrifice, although I still think one can offer a doulia sacrifice without contradicting latria in this sense, which is a good thing.

The “real change” seems like a “no turning back” sort of principle. If I read it right, that’s the differentiator for latria, as an offering to God. For example, when the Jews killed a bull as an offering to God, it was completely tended to according to Mosaic law. Only Priests could eat a part of it, I think, but the rest was burnt to ashes. Hence, there was “no turning back” by the donor.

In terms of a doulia sacrifice, then, does it mean we can turn back? As if the change was not as permanent? Or, if we claim to make a sacrifice in the doulia sense, is it considered not real? I tend to think, if someone became a franciscan friar, it would be a real change in one’s lifestyle (although it still goes to serve God). I guess they could quit, but some are supposed to be in for life…

Making sense?

 

[anon91549587]

Would you see consecration to mary as an offering ?

 

[Isearch]

Letter to the Hebrews was juxtaposing two kinds of Divinely-ordained priesthood: the Levite priests and the priesthood of Christ. Keep in mind that the Levitical priesthood was instituted by God through Moses, whose sin was disobeying God’s one direct command, and this priesthood’s first high priest was Aaron, whose cowardliness led him to sin by making the golden calf; while the ministerial priesthood of the Apostolic Churches was physically instituted by Christ Himself, who’s truly God and truly Man.

One could view the description of the priests you have quoted from Hebrews to be describing the founders of each priesthood: Moses and Aaron, who were both sinners, mortal, and currently dead; as opposed to Christ, who is Sinless, Resurrected and Immortal. If he objects to this comparison by stating that both are instituted by God, then respond that this was comparing the human elements in each priesthood’s foundation (and I doubt your opponent would deny Christ’s Humanity).

 

[OddBird]

I tend to think, if someone became a franciscan friar, it would be a real change in one’s lifestyle (although it still goes to serve God).

I think dedicating one’s life to God in a religious order would be latria, even if one has a particular relationship with and devotion to, to follow your example, St Francis. I don’t think people enter orders for a particular saint. They enter orders for God, but there are some saints whose way to God and sainthood “speaks” to them more than others.

Maybe this could be one way to put it, that doulia is, ultimately, a way to latria, and is not an end in itself ? Can doulia be more than that ?

 

[Wm777]

Maybe this could be one way to put it, that doulia is, ultimately, a way to latria, and is not an end in itself ? Can doulia be more than that ?

Your conclusion (above) sounds like one perfect way to describe it, but I am still pretty sure joining an order is doulia, not latria.

The reason is, there’s lots of orders and ways of life; and, if their rule is vatican approved, then they are seen as conducive to latria. But they are still different lifestyles.

One way to look at it might be like joining one of the military services. Some join the navy, some the army, some the air force. They are all forms of service to protect a country (latria), but they assume different “modes” (doulia) of service.

I guess, if you’re going to die by fighting at sea, land or air, then you still end up dead (latria)… doulia seems to be based more on the notion of whether your better at swimming, running or flying…

Hmmm…

 

[Vico]

Am trying to distinguish what the difference between Latria (worship due God alone) is compared to other modes of piety, such as Doulia (veneration in the service of other Saintly souls), and Hyperdoulia (veneration in the service of Our Lady).
…

Modern Catholic Dictionary (Fr. John Hardon)

Worship.
Acknowledgment of another’s worth, dignity, or superior position. In religion, worship is given either to God, and then it is adoration, or to the angels and saints, and it is called veneration. Divine worship actually includes three principal acts, namely adoration (or the recognition of God’s infinite perfection), prayer or the asking for divine help, and sacrifice or the offering of something precious to God. Worship as veneration also has three principal forms, whereby the angels and saints are honored for their sanctity, asked to intercede before the divine Majesty, and imitated in their love and service of God.

(Etym. Old English weorthscipe, honor, dignity, reverence: weorth , worth +ship.)

 

[vsedriver]

Somehow the church formed a distinction between latria and doulia, and I think that is the difference I’m looking to identify… There must be some distinct differentiators between the worship due God versus the love and respect due our brethren… and that is what I’m trying to identify

worship requires a sacrifice