If the Skull of a Catholic Saint Isn’t Idolatry, Why Is an African Sacred Object Automatically Called Idolatry?
If a Catholic tells an African traditional worshipper: “You must understand our distinction between worship and veneration before calling us idolaters,”
then the African traditional worshipper has every right to respond: “Then you must also understand our distinction between the object and what the object represents before calling us idolaters.”
You cannot demand interpretive charity for your own religious tradition while refusing to extend it to someone else’s.
Fada Angelo Chidi Unegbu asked: “Is this courtesy of understanding only for Christians/Catholics, or is it also extended to other religions?”
My answer is this: It must be extended to everyone. But understanding a religious practice does not mean accepting its theology as true.
Fada Angelo, therefore, I would answer your question this way:
Yes the courtesy must be extended beyond Catholics.
But no, the conclusion does not have to be the same for every religion.
That distinction is extremely important. When Catholics venerate the skull of St. Agatha, we explain that the skull is not God, nor do we believe that the bone itself is the object of latria, the worship owed to God alone.
Scripture itself shows that God has sometimes worked through physical things associated with His servants. The bronze serpent was made at God’s command (Numbers 21:8–9). The bones of Elisha were associated with a miraculous restoration of life (2 Kings 13:20–21). And in Acts 19:11–12, even handkerchiefs that had touched Paul’s body were associated with extraordinary healings.
So, the mere presence of a physical object in religious devotion does not automatically make something idolatry.
The real question is: What does the person believe about that object?
Before calling someone an idolater, we should first understand what they actually believe. But here is where I want to push the question further.
Does that principle apply equally to African traditional religious practices?
Suppose an African community preserves a sacred object associated with an ancestor.
Suppose they have a carved staff representing a revered person. Suppose a shrine symbolizes a particular spiritual reality.
Before I call them idolaters, shouldn’t I ask:
What does this object represent to you?
Do you believe the object itself is God?
Are you worshipping the object, or is it functioning as a representation or symbol of something else?
Whom are you ultimately addressing through this practice?
Those questions should be asked honestly. Because if I demand that people understand Catholic veneration before accusing Catholics of idolatry, I cannot suddenly abandon that principle when I encounter an African religious practice. That would be a double standard.
However, understanding is not the same as approving. After listening carefully to an African traditional believer, a Catholic may still conclude:
“I understand what you believe, but I believe this practice contradicts Christian revelation.”
That is a legitimate theological disagreement. The problem is when we skip the first step and go straight to: “I don’t understand it, therefore it is idolatry.”
And Scripture itself gives us a warning here. Paul did not walk into Athens, see the altar “To an Unknown God,” and simply start shouting at the Athenians that they were stupid idolaters.
He first observed, listened, and engaged their worldview. Then he proclaimed the Gospel to them (Acts 17:22–31). That is evangelization: understand first, then proclaim, not condemn first and understand later.
But let me also turn the mirror toward Africans.
We should not hide behind the word “culture” to defend everything our ancestors practiced. If a particular practice gives divine worship to a created being or item, then Christians have every right to challenge it.
Not everything African is automatically pagan.
Not everything traditional is automatically idolatry.
And not everything called “culture” is beyond theological criticism.
At the end of the day, the goal should not be to create a situation where Catholics must accept African traditional religion, or where Africans must accept every Catholic practice simply because they have been explained.
The goal is intellectual honesty and mutual respect. Catholics have the right to explain why they believe the veneration of saints and relics is different from the worship owed to God. African traditional believers equally deserve the opportunity to explain what their symbols, objects, ancestors, shrines, and rituals mean before Christians pronounce judgment on them.
After understanding, we may still disagree and we may strongly disagree. But disagreement should come after understanding, not instead of understanding.
If we want others to interpret our faith according to what we actually believe, then we should be willing to extend the same courtesy to them.
Rev fr Prince Chidi Philip