Catholic Commentary
The Worst of All Idols: Creatures Deprived of God's Blessing
18Yes, and they worship the creatures that are most hateful, for, being compared as to lack of sense, these are worse than all others;19Neither, as seen beside other creatures, are they beautiful, so that one should desire them, but they have escaped both the praise of God and his blessing.
Wisdom 15:18–19 condemns the Egyptian worship of loathsome animals as the lowest form of idolatry, presenting creatures that lack beauty, utility, or divine blessing as objects of reverence. This descent into animal worship represents the complete negation of creation's natural capacity to direct human understanding toward God.
Idolatry doesn't fail because we worship the wrong god—it fails because we've chosen objects so devoid of beauty and blessing that they cannot possibly bear the weight of our longing.
"They have escaped both the praise of God and his blessing." This is the most theologically laden phrase in the cluster. The "praise of God" (epainon theou) likely alludes to the refrain of Genesis 1 — "And God saw that it was good" (καλόν, LXX) — God's own aesthetic and moral approbation of each creature He made. The "blessing of God" recalls the specific bestowal of divine favor that follows creation (Gen 1:22, 28). By saying these creatures have "escaped" both, the author is not claiming they are outside creation or uncreated; rather, they occupy — in the religious imagination of their worshippers — a space from which all redemptive reference to the Creator has been evacuated. Idolatry has stripped even the creature of its natural transparency to God. In worshipping what is beneath beauty and beyond blessing, the Egyptians have constructed a religious world that is a total inversion: not merely the absence of God, but the active negation of every created sign that might point toward Him.
Typological and Spiritual Senses
Spiritually, the "creatures deprived of God's blessing" function as a type of every object of disordered desire — the things we clutch at when we have abandoned the hierarchy of goods established in creation. The descent from worshipping cosmic beauty (chapter 13) to worshipping loathsome animals traces the interior logic of all idolatry: it always ends by degrading both the worshipper and the thing worshipped. The anagogical sense points toward the eschatological horror of a soul that, having refused to ascend through creation toward God, descends with its objects of worship into irrelevance and oblivion.
Catholic tradition reads this passage through multiple mutually reinforcing lenses.
The Church Fathers were acutely attentive to this text. Origen (Contra Celsum III, 17–19) cites the Book of Wisdom's animal-worship polemic against pagan accusations that Christianity was philosophically inferior, arguing that Jewish and Christian rejection of idolatry represented a higher rationality. Clement of Alexandria (Stromata I) uses the Egyptian animal cults as a philosophical foil to demonstrate how idolatry degrades the intellect. Augustine (City of God VIII, 24) draws on the Wisdom tradition to argue that the Roman religious system, like the Egyptian, ultimately venerated creatures rather than the Creator — a corruption of the natural theology that even pagan philosophers glimpsed.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church (§2112–2114) teaches that idolatry "perverts our innate sense of God" and consists in divinizing "what is not God." Crucially, §2114 notes that idolatry "rejects the unique Lordship of God; it is therefore incompatible with communion with God." Wisdom 15:19 demonstrates that this incompatibility is not merely juridical (a broken law) but ontological: the idolater ruptures his capacity to receive God's blessing by directing his religious energies toward objects that have been, in effect, evacuated of their participation in that blessing.
Pope John Paul II in Fides et Ratio (§§15–16) echoes the Wisdom tradition by arguing that a human being who worships finite things is one who has "forgotten" the transcendent orientation of reason itself. Creatures worshipped as gods do not elevate the worshipper; they degrade him to their own level.
The phrase "escaped God's blessing" also has profound sacramental resonance in Catholic theology. For the Fathers, blessing (eulogia) is not merely an emotional favor but an ontological participation in divine life — a foretaste of what the sacraments communicate. To worship objects "escaped from blessing" is to orient one's entire religious life away from the sacramental economy and toward nothingness.
The Egyptian animal cults are long gone, but the logic of Wisdom 15:18–19 is disturbingly contemporary. The sacred author's key insight is not that Egyptians were uniquely foolish but that idolatry follows a consistent trajectory: it always ends by directing human religious longing toward things that cannot bear the weight of ultimacy, and eventually toward things that are actively beneath human dignity.
Contemporary Catholics may recognize this pattern in ideological forms of idolatry — political movements, digital platforms, parasocial celebrity culture, or consumer identities — that increasingly demand the kind of total devotion once reserved for God, while offering in return not beauty, not blessing, but precisely what the author identifies here: a relationship with something that has "escaped God's blessing." The spiritual warning is practical: when our primary sources of meaning leave us emptier, more anxious, and less capable of perceiving beauty and goodness in ordinary life, the Book of Wisdom diagnoses the condition. The remedy is not first an argument but a reorientation of worship — recovering, through liturgy, prayer, and the sacramental life, the capacity to encounter creatures as transparent to their Creator rather than as replacements for Him.
Commentary
Wisdom 15:18 — "Yes, and they worship the creatures that are most hateful"
The Greek underlying "most hateful" (echthista) carries connotations of active aversion and loathing — not merely aesthetic unpleasantness but moral revulsion. The sacred author has been systematically descending through the ranks of Egyptian idolatry since chapter 13, moving from the worship of natural forces (stars, wind, water), to handcrafted idols of wood and metal, and now to what he presents as the absolute bottom: the veneration of certain animals. The comparative structure is deliberate and cumulative. Earlier in the polemic (13:1–9), the author showed some sympathy — or at least philosophical comprehension — for those who marveled at the beauty of the cosmos and mistakenly divinized it. He called them "not greatly to be blamed" (13:6). The worship of man-made idols was worse (chapters 13–14). But animal worship, specifically of hateful creatures, is the worst of all.
The clause "being compared as to lack of sense, these are worse than all others" sharpens the argument philosophically. The Greek hamarteîn here suggests failing or falling short of a standard. The comparison is between the worshipped animals and other animals: even within the animal kingdom, where none possess reason (logos), these particular creatures fall beneath the common animal standard — they lack even the compensating quality of usefulness or noble bearing that might give a lion, an ox, or an eagle some analogical capacity to signify divine power. The author seems to have in mind creatures such as crocodiles, scarab beetles, ibises, serpents, and other creatures revered in the Egyptian religious system — animals often associated in Jewish perception with filth, pestilence, and danger. The theological irony is exquisite: the Egyptians, who prided themselves on a sophisticated and ancient religion, have ended by prostrating themselves before creatures that even other animals surpass in dignity.
Wisdom 15:19 — "Neither, as seen beside other creatures, are they beautiful"
The argument pivots from the rational to the aesthetic. In the Platonic and Stoic philosophical vocabulary that the Book of Wisdom strategically employs, beauty (kalos) is not a superficial quality but a participation in the transcendent Good, an outward sign of inner order and divine favor. Created beauty, in this framework, is a kind of natural doxology — a creature's beauty is its implicit praise of the Creator. The author is therefore making a profound theological point: a beautiful creature, even when wrongly worshipped, still accidentally directs the attentive mind toward the divine source of that beauty (a point he made charitably in 13:3–5). But these creatures possess no such beauty. They cannot even accidentally serve as distorted signposts toward God.