Perron's reading is new: the Fathers and Rome's own interpreters read it as worship of angels
First, this invention of Perron's is plainly new; no Christian had heard of it before his time.
The ancients, such as Origen, Chrysostom, Hilary writing under Ambrose's name, Pelagius writing under Jerome's name, Theodoret, Theophylact and Oecumenius, all take "the religion of angels" to mean a religion with angels as its object. And not one interpreter of the Roman Church before Perron took Paul's words in Perron's sense.
Nor could even so great a cardinal's authority win that invention over the most learned men of his own church after him. They rejected it outright as empty, among them the Jesuit Petavius, a distinguished student of antiquity (Theological Dogmas, tome 3, book 2, chapter 9, paragraph 16).
Latin
LXXXII. Sed primum istud Perronii commentum plane novum est, & apud Christianos omnes ad ejus usque tempora inauditum. Nec enim veteres tantum, ut Origenes, Chrysostomus, Hilarius sub Ambrosii, Pelagius sub Hieronymi nomine, Theodoretus, Theophylactus & Oecumenius per Angelorum Religionem intelligunt eam cujus Angeli objectum essent; sed ne quidem ullus interpretum Ecclesiae Romanae, quo sensu Perronius, ante ipsum Pauli verba sumpsit. Neque etiam tanti Cardinalis authoritas doctissimis post eum in Ecclesia ista viris commentum illud probare potuit. Sed ab iis diserte tanquam inane rejectum est, ut inter alios a Petavio Jesuita Nobili Antiquario. Theol. dogm. Tom. 3. lib. 2. cap. 9. paragr. 16.