Read an Interview with Matthew, the owner of CathInfo

Author Topic: Curse of Ham  (Read 1889 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Anonymous

  • Guest
Curse of Ham
« on: November 13, 2018, 10:16:01 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Can someone explain briefly what is this about?

    Offline LaramieHirsch

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2559
    • Reputation: +864/-181
    • Gender: Male
      • h
    Re: Curse of Ham
    « Reply #1 on: November 13, 2018, 10:23:54 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • We've had an entire fiery thread about this.  


    * Race Issues 1a: Catholic Thoughts On The Curse of Ham Extending Back Two Centuries
    * Race Issues 1b: Christendom’s Thoughts On The Curse of Ham Extending Into Antiquity
    * Race Issues 1c: The Curse of Ham – What To Do With It?


    But I've also written a few articles about this.  I'll try to get them uploaded on the new blog for you, and link them when I get a chance.
    .........................

    Before some audiences not even the possession of the exactest knowledge will make it easy for what we say to produce conviction. For argument based on knowledge implies instruction, and there are people whom one cannot instruct.  - Aristotle


    Anonymous

    • Guest
    Re: Curse of Ham
    « Reply #2 on: November 13, 2018, 01:04:56 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • When candied, it's so very good, but so very high in cholesterol.

    Anonymous

    • Guest
    Re: Curse of Ham
    « Reply #3 on: November 13, 2018, 01:09:08 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Cholesterol, however, is vital to the production of testosterone. Hence the reason why millennial vegans end up acting like "soy boys" -- they are low T, passive wimps as well as actual consumers of soy.

    Anonymous

    • Guest
    Re: Curse of Ham
    « Reply #4 on: November 13, 2018, 02:43:25 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • The real curse is when the ham is mixed in with store bought eggs - now there's a meal so high in cholesterol that it's cursed! :jester: 


    Offline Quid Retribuam Domino

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 487
    • Reputation: +264/-354
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Curse of Ham
    « Reply #5 on: November 13, 2018, 07:53:13 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • The curse of Ham might be a curse of blacks and Arabs. (Today would be such people who remain as pagans, infidels, idolaters, and adherents to

    The Bible states in Habacuc 3:7
    Quote
    I saw the tents of Ethiopia for their iniquity, the curtains of the land of Madian shall be troubled.

    The Catholic Haydock Bible's commentaries on that verse:
    Quote
    Ver. 7. Ethiopia, the land of the Blacks, and Madian, are here taken for the enemies of God and his people, who shall perish for their iniquity. (Challoner) --- Chus peopled that part of Arabia. (Haydock) --- Hebrew has Chusan, perhaps to rhyme with Madian; though some think that Chusan (defeated by Othoniel) and Madian (over whom Gedeon gained a complete victory) are designated, Judges ii and vi. When the Hebrews had crossed the Red Sea, the Arabs and Madianites removed their tents in great trepidation. (Calmet) --- These nations dwelt chiefly under tents, or skins, which would be removed in time of war. (Worthington)

    Is it any wonder that The International Jew, who is the ancient enemy of the Lord Jesus Christ, is orchestrating the invasion of Europe by blacks and Arabs as to wipe out any last remnant of Christendom and the very race (white caucasoids) who were blessed by God for having spread the Gospels to the four corners of the globe?

    Of course, any black or Arab who has water baptism into Jesus Christ and lives the Catholic Faith has this curse removed, but, although they are healed through baptism, the scars of the curse remain, which can make them susceptible to their old ways. Scar tissue on healed wounds are more susceptible to damage.  Just look at Haiti. Just look at the inner cities in the U.S.
    From the woman came the beginning of sin, and by her we all die. ~ Ecclesiasticus 25:33

    International Women's Day is a day we all celebrate Eve's rebellion at the Tree and our plummet into sin.

    Offline Quid Retribuam Domino

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 487
    • Reputation: +264/-354
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Curse of Ham
    « Reply #6 on: November 13, 2018, 08:13:29 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • The curse of Ham might be a curse of blacks and Arabs. (Today would be such people who remain as pagans, infidels, idolaters, and adherents to

    *adherents to monkey Muhammed
    From the woman came the beginning of sin, and by her we all die. ~ Ecclesiasticus 25:33

    International Women's Day is a day we all celebrate Eve's rebellion at the Tree and our plummet into sin.

    Offline Nadir

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 5928
    • Reputation: +3264/-189
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Curse of Ham
    « Reply #7 on: November 13, 2018, 08:46:48 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • It is really the curse of Chanaan, youngest son of Cham. Cham did the evil act and the curse was put on his son. Loss of the land of Chanaan, and to be a servant, seemingly to all, was visited upon Chanaan who apparently drew Cham's attention to Noe's nakedness and ridiculed it.  Nought to do with blacks or Arabs. Freedom comes with adherence to Jesus Christ. And of course Jesus Himself was to become a Servant. 

    From the Douay Rheims Bible, Genesis 9:

    [21]And (Noe) drinking of the wine was made drunk, and was uncovered in his tent. [22]Which when Cham the father of Chanaan had seen, to wit, that his father's nakedness was uncovered, he told it to his two brethren without. [23] But Sem and Japheth put a cloak upon their shoulders, and going backward, covered the nakedness of their father: and their faces were turned away, and they saw not their father's nakedness. [24] And Noe awaking from the wine, when he had learned what his younger son had done to him, [25] He said: Cursed be Chanaan, a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren.
    [21] "Drunk": Noe by the judgment of the fathers was not guilty of sin, in being overcome by wine: because he knew not the strength of it.
    [23] "Covered the nakedness": Thus, as St. Gregory takes notice L. 35; Moral. c. 22, we ought to cover the nakedness, that is, the sins, of our spiritual parents and superiors.
    [25] "Cursed be Chanaan": The curses, as well as the blessings, of the patriarchs, were prophetical: And this in particular is here recorded by Moses, for the children of Israel, who were to possess the land of Chanaan. But why should Chanaan be cursed for his father's faults? The Hebrews answer, that he being then a boy, was the first that saw his grandfather's nakedness, and told his father Cham of it; and joined with him in laughing at it: which drew upon him, rather than upon the rest of the children of Cham, this prophetical curse.
    [26] And he said: Blessed be the Lord God of Sem, be Chanaan his servant. [27]May God enlarge Japheth, and may he dwell in the tents of Sem, and Chanaan be his servant. [28] And Noe lived after the flood three hundred and fifty years: [29]And all his days were in the whole nine hundred and fifty years: and he died.




    Offline LaramieHirsch

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2559
    • Reputation: +864/-181
    • Gender: Male
      • h
    Re: Curse of Ham
    « Reply #8 on: November 13, 2018, 09:10:11 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • Race Issues 1a: Catholic Thoughts On The Curse of Ham Extending Back Two Centuries

    Let's start from the beginning. 

    The Curse of Ham. Shall we believe it, or shall we not believe it?

    And the sons of Noe who came out of the ark, were Sem, Cham, and Japheth: and Cham is the father of Chanaan. These three are the sons of Noe: and from these was all mankind spread over the whole earth. And Noe, a husbandman, began to till the ground, and planted a vineyard. And drinking of the wine was made drunk, and was uncovered in his tent. Which when Cham the father of Chanaan had seen, to wit, that his father's nakedness was uncovered, he told it to his two brethren without. But Sem and Japheth put a cloak upon their shoulders, and going backward, covered the nakedness of their father: and their faces were turned away, and they saw not their father's nakedness. And Noe awaking from the wine, when he had learned what his younger son had done to him, He said: Cursed be Chanaan, a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren. And he said: Blessed be the Lord God of Sem, be Chanaan his servant. May God enlarge Japheth, and may he dwell in the tents of Sem, and Chanaan be his servant.
    -Genesis 10:18-27
     

    The passage actually sounds more like The Curse of Canaan, doesn't it? However, "Curse of Ham" is the running title of this legend, so we'll go with that.

    More importantly, when we say "Curse of Ham," what are we talking about here? Are we talking about a literal curse being put on someone? Yes.  There can be no doubt. There is definitely a curse being sown in this passage.  And it's a pretty severe curse.  It basically is a curse, by Noah, aimed at what would become a significant portion of the global population. 

    Current Modern Thought

    A local Tulsa Protestant preacher, Apostle Frederick K.C. Price, says the following in his very affordable book The Truth About Race: Did God Curse Black People:

    There are approximately 203 verses in the Bible where the words curse, cursed, cursedst, curses, cursest, curseth, cursing and cursings are found.  In all those verses, I have yet to find one reference to a man, a group of men or a nation that was cursed eternally or in perpetuity, leaving no possiblity of that curse being lifted, not one.

    All of this mess about the curse of Ham is a bunch of foolishness.  It's solely a case of color and ethnic prejudice.
      

    Such a curse as "The Curse of Ham" is on the same level as the curse of Cain and his progeny, the predicament of  Ishmael's progeny, the dilemma of Isaac and Esau, not to mention the stern decree that God pronounced on all men and women when He kicked Adam and Eve out of the Garden of Eden. 

    Such permanent arrangements have occurred before. 

    The real heart of the matter is this: Does the curse that Noah placed on his offspring explain black skin and other physical and mental features of the world's various black people?

    Being the Traditionalist that I am, I tend to go along with the historical current of thought. I tend to agree with Church Fathers, the philosophical wisdom of antiquity, and so on. Therefore, perhaps the better question to ask is: Based on the perceptions of historians and scholars, shall we give any consideration to what is known as "The Curse of Ham?"

    If you go to Wikipedia, you can readily observe that most modern thinkers are eager to relegate the concept of Ham's Curse to the dustbin of history. Not a small number of thinkers are evolutionists, and not a small amount of thinkers harbor animosity toward the Biblical narrative.

    It therefore makes sense that these people would happily do their best to discredit the traditional line of thought that Ham's line was cursed. As of the date of this blog post, Wikipedia reads:

    "Nevertheless, most Christian denominations and all Islamic, Jewish denominations now strongly disagree with such interpretations due to the fact that in the biblical text, Ham himself is not cursed and race or skin color is never mentioned." 

    What do the Wikipedians care about this curse being illegitimate among Christians?  They're atheist liberals, for the most part.

    The trend of thought, at least on Wikipedia, is that the Curse of Ham has been utilized to justify slavery. It is stated that in Medieval Europe, serfs were descended from Ham, and so their station in life were justified by Ham's curse, while nobles were descended from Japeth, and free men from Shem. Wikipedia's authors relate how The Curse of Ham narrative was co-opted by racist participants of the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade to legitimize their business.

    In this blog post, we will not yet go back so far as the Medieval European view on this matter.  We will first examine strictly Catholic views on black etiology, going back to the beginning of the 19th century.

    Nuns and Priests

    Indeed, it is true, the last two centuries gave way to a lot of people, including black Christians themselves, who believed that the etiology of blacks stems from a cursed line that descended from Ham.  As recently as the mid-1800s, you had missionaries such as Blessed Maria Theresa Ledochowska, a religious sister who genuinely believed that the cursed black race could also be redeemed by God. 

    Irish Catholic priest, Father James L. Meagher, had much to say about the three tribes that descended from Noah.  In the following passage from his 1906 book, How Christ Said the First Mass, there is a particular section that contrasts the three branches that came from Noah.  He extols the children of Japeth, who he regards as the white peoples of the earth who would accept Christ.  The sons of Shem, excluding the line that produced Jesus Christ, he regards as stunted, citing them as stagnant, conservative, and unprogressive.  He claims they've hardly improved since the patriarchs because, for whatever reason, they were not blessed with the grace of change. 

    The children of Ham, however, are regarded as cursed, due to Ham's transgression.
     
    The Holy Ghost drew back the curtain hiding the future and revealed the Crucified when Noe blessed and cursed the nations—the races—in his three sons. The mighty movements of mankind then begun have continued till oar day.

    Noe, the second Adam, father of mankind, high priest and image of Jesus Christ, planted a vineyard, pressed the grapes and made wine. Not knowing its effect he took too much, lay naked in his tent, an image of our High Priest stripped of his garments, crucified, dead on the cross. Ham, Noe's second son mocked his father as the Jews mocked the dying Christ. His two other sons, Sem and Japheth with a cloak, covered their father's nakedness.

    Rising from his sacrifice, Noe blessed and cursed, as Christ was to rise from the tomb after his sacrifice and bless his followers with the gift of the Holy Ghost, while the curse of his blood rested on the Jewish nation.

    "Cursed be Canaan, a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren." He could not curse Ham, for God had blessed the three sons and the curse rested on Canaan's children. Ham's sons settled Palestine, which they cursed with the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah. But Ham's tribes settled Africa, and find their vocation as slaves and servants waiting on the white men. Cursed in the passion their father mocked in Noe, the African race love to serve as servants to the other races. Living since in deepest degradation, among them never rose religion, literature, invention, genius, or progress. The other races will not receive on an equality one in whose veins flows their tainted blood.

    Prophetic words the Holy Ghost pronounced through Noe on the sons who covered him. "Blessed be the Lord God of Sem, let Canaan be his servant." Thus he determined that the " Lord God," Jesus Christ would be born of Sem's race, the Jews. Christ's genealogy shows him as son of Sem.* He is the glory of the Jewish Semites.

    Such was the opinion of this particular Irish priest.


    The Cuckservative Bishop

    In his book Cuckservative: How "Conservatives" Betrayed America, Vox Day remarks:

    Of late, evangelicals in particular have embraced transracial adoption as a new Christian virtue, with the amount of virtue endowed by the adoptee primarily dependent upon the color of his skin. 

    If that is the case, then it can be said that Bishop Auguste Martin of Louisiana was possibly one of the first major cases of Cuckservatism in the United States. 

    This particular bishop wanted to cite the Curse of Ham in order to justify bringing blacks into America.  In an 1861 pastoral letter that was later discredited, the bishop argued that God had arranged to have good Catholics

    snatch from the barbarity of their ferocious customs thousands of children of the race of Canaan, upon whom the curse of an outraged Father continues to weigh heavily, almost everywhere.  He commits them to the care of the privileged ones of the great human family for His own purposes and these people must be their shepherds and their fathers rather than their masters.
      
    Father Napoleon Joseph Perchr, coadjutor of the Archdiocese of New Orleans, actually gave his imprimatur for the bishop's pastoral letter to be published in the local Catholic newspaper. 

    However, in 1864 Bishop Martin was later countered in a point-by-point argumentative letter by a priest who quite disagreed with him, Fr. Vincenzo M. Gatti.  In order to fulfill the task entrusted to him by the Most Reverend Secretary of State for the Vatican, Cardinal Barnabo, he argues (emphasis mine):

    The Bishop supposes that there exists a natural difference between the Negroes, whom he calls the children of Canaan, and the Whites, when he says that the latter are the privileged ones of the great human family and the former are still now lying under the curse of Noah. And he makes it the latter's duty to be the Negroes' sheperds, fathers, and masters...we also must observe that both the ancient and the modern supporters of the theory of slavery advanced as one of the reasons for its acceptability the fact that the Negroes have been subjected to others by the curse of Noah. But those who oppose this theory, besides denying its validity, at least after the Christian era when the curse would not be valid any longer, deny the fact itself, i.e., that the Negroes descend from Canaan. For from Sacred History we deduce that the children of Canaan lived in "Cananea," and that in Africa the other children of [C]ham spread out--such as Chus, Mesrains and Phut, who were not cursed by Noah. Noah cursed only Canaan, from whom the Canaanites descend, and who were later driven out or killed by the Hebrews when they conquered Palestine, or were reduced to slavery. To them belonged the Gabonites, though they saved their lives by fraud... 

    The Bishop calls the Negroes poor children, while they are not such. As I stressed above, Noah did not [sic]curse Canaan...but even if they were cursed by Noah, they are not cursed any longer after the coming of Jesus Christ when, as the Apostle says, there is no distinction between Jew and gentile, between freeman and slave, between man and woman, since we are all sons of the same divine Father. In contrast, Bishop Martin seems to consider the opposite teaching to be the teaching of the Gospel. Did Jesus Christ say: "Go snatch them by force from their native country, drag them to your countries, and convert them?" No, He did not.


    Bishop Martin was repudiated by Father Gatti, the Congregation of the Index, and the pope* himself.  This is well and good, for the Church has long condemned slavery. 

    St. Patrick, St. Bathilde, St. Anskar, St. Wulfstan, St. Anselm. St Thomas Aquinas, and even Pope Paul III condemned slavery as a sin, and it is even an excommunicable practice.  In 1839, Gregory XVI condemned slavery in his apostolic letter, In Supremo Apostolatus.  It is just and right that slavery was condemned again in this instance.    

    And to his credit, Bishop Martin backtracked and started an apostolic mission to care for freed slaves. 

    However, note that Fr. Gatti limits his historical knowledge to only the Holy Scriptures.  He gives himself a little wiggle room when he writes: "but even if they were cursed."  Just in case it turns out that he is wrong.  

    Yet, shall it then be assumed that there is nothing more to the "Ham Curse" than the fact that the Bible states that Noah cursed Canaanite people?  Shall Holy Scriptures serve as the be-all-end-all authority on what went down on that day between Noah and his son?  Shall we exclude the possibility that more happens in Biblical history than the Bible actually covers?  

    A Pope 

    So far, I have mentioned a beautified religious sister, a priest, as well as a bishop who cited the Curse of Ham as the primary etiology of black people  But there was even a pope who attributed the source of the black races to Ham, and that was Pope Pius IX.  This is his 1873 prayer for the conversion of blacks in Central Africa:

    Let us pray for the most wretched Ethiopians in Central Africa, that Almighty God may at length move the curse of Cham from their hearts, and grant them the blessing to be found only in Jesus Christ, our God and Lord.

    This was the pope's 1873 prayer for the conversion of blacks in Central Africa.  And yet, in spite of this acknowledgement of the curse, only ten years earlier...he was the very pope who repudiated Bishop Martin*. 

    Apparently Fr. Gatti's letter of repudiation did not convince the pope of a contrary origin of black people.

    A Mystic Saint

    Finally, I'll conclude with a well-known saint, who had a vision of what happened between Noah, Ham, and his son.  Her name is Venerable Catherine Anne Emmerich, a 19th century stigmatic who suffered in this life, but whose body remains incorrupt to this day. 

    There is much debate about her visions. Solange Hertz warns about the recording of her visions by writer Klemens Maria Brentano, stating that: 

    How we react to her is in some wise an indication of how we shall react to the other signs and wonders our Lord predicted would arise to try us in the latter days. 

    While not doubting Brentano's sincerity in the matter, Hertz cites his disjointed collection of dictations, subsequent editors who finished his work after his death, and contradictions with other visionaries--not to mention the collection of apocryphal books they found after he passed away. 

    On the other hand, who is to say that Brentano wasn't inspired to go out and research ancient Biblical history after being inspired by Emmerich's visions?

    A writer who calls himself Samuel Sinner, in his article, Some Further Perspectives on Anne Catherine Emmerich, counters that the suspicions against Brentano are overblown.

    From a comparative philological and literary view, the contention that Brentano "fabricated almost all" the Emmerich material is exaggerated and false. Editorial work there certainly was, but Brentano's accounts agree with the basic picture of Emmerich found in the firsthand written accounts of Dr. Franz Wilhelm Wesener (Emmerich's medical doctor) and author Luisa Hensel. Moreover, as the internationally renowned and critically reserved Germanist Dr. Anton Brieger states, the Emmerich visions recorded by Brentano have all the marks of a woman's psychology and a feminine attention to detail. Additionally, Fr. Joseph Adam, the author of Emmerich's new official positio accepted by the Roman authorities, has demonstrated that the former charges made by Fr. Winfried Humpfner (whose activities led to the 1928 reponatur), namely that Brentano was guilty of wholesale fabrication, were "rabid attacks" against a pious Catholic, and were furthermore "hard and pre-emptory." Although recognizing at times their problematic nature and that they were adapted and edited, Adam nevertheless characterizes the Brentano Emmerich writings as exhibiting simultaneously "a deep piety and a solid ecclesiastical spirit."

    Sinner states that before condemning her legitimacy, Emmerich's critics should first do diligence and conduct research, updating themselves on the most recent German, Latin, and Italian documents.  He notes that she can be a polarizing figure--most likely because of the passage that is included below.

    When it comes to visions, caution is understood.  Not everyone can digest such material--just as not everyone can digest everything that comes off of this blog.  I've already given my two cents about those who disregard prophecy and visions.  But for those who have eyes to see and ears to hear, and who are capable of taking such information with the proper grain of salt, her account is truly intriguing, if not inspiring. 

    And with that, I give you the vision of the Venerable Catherine Anne Emmerich.  Her account of Noah and his children begins with Cain, the son of Adam and Eve.  This vision takes place before the Deluge, and we are offered a window into the antediluvian world.  It is interesting to note that when Cain is cursed by God for murdering Abel, his skin also turns dark.

    CAIN. THE CHILDREN OF GOD. THE GIANTS

    I saw that Cain conceived on Mount Olivet the design to murder Abel, After the deed, he wandered about the same spot frightened and distracted planting trees and tearing them up again. Then I saw a majestic Figure in the form of a man refulgent with light appear to him. ''Cain," He said, "where is thy brother Abel?" Cain did not at first see the Figure; but when he did, he turned and answered: "I know not. He has not been given in charge to me." But when God replied that Abel's blood cried to Him from the earth, Cain grew more troubled, and I saw that he disputed long with God. God told him that he should be cursed upon the earth, that it should bring forth no fruit for him, and that he should forthwith flee from the land in which he then dwelt. Cain responded that everywhere his fellow men would seek to kill him. There were already many people upon the earth. Cain was very old and had children. Abel also left children, and there were other brothers and sisters, the children of Adam. But God replied that it would not be so; that whoever should kill Cain should himself be punished sevenfold, and He placed a sign upon him that no one should slay him. Cain's posterity gradually became colored. Cham's children also were browner than those of Sem. The nobler races were always of a lighter color. They who were distinguished by a particular mark engendered children of the same stamp; and as corruption increased, the mark also increased until at last it covered the whole body, and people became darker and darker. But yet in the beginning there were no people perfectly black; they became so only by degrees.

    God pointed out to Cain a region to which he should flee. And because Cain said: 'Then, wilt Thou let me starve?"—(the earth was for him accursed)—God answered no, that he should eat the flesh of animals. He told him likewise that a nation would arise from him, and that good also would come from him. Before this men ate no flesh.

    Cain went forth and built a city, which he named after his son Henoch.

    Abel was slain in the valley of Josaphat opposite Mount Calvary. Numerous murders and evil deeds took place there at a subsequent period. Cain slew Abel with a kind of club that he used to break soft stones and earth when planting in the fields. The club must have been of hard stone, for it was shaped like a pickaxe, the handle of wood.

    We must not picture to ourselves the earth before the Deluge as it is now. Palestine was by no means so broken up by valleys and ravines. Plains were far more extensive,

    and single mountains less lofty. The Mount of Olives was at that time only a gentle rising. The Crib Cave of Bethlehem was as later a wild cavern, but the surroundings were different.

    The people of those early times were larger, though not out of proportion. We would regard them with astonishment, but not with fright, for they were far more beautiful in form than people of a later period. Among the old marble statues that I see in many places lying in subterranean caves, may be found similar figures.

    Cain led his children and grandchildren to the region pointed out to him, and there they separated. Of Cain himself, I have never seen anything more that was sinful. His punishment appeared to consist in hard, but fruitless labor. Nothing in which he was personally engaged succeeded. I saw that he was mocked and reviled by his children and grandchildren, treated badly in every way. And yet they followed him as their leader, though as one accursed. I saw that Cain was severely punished, but not damned.

    One of Cain's descendants was Thubalcain, the originator of numerous arts, and the father of the giants. I have frequently seen that, when the angels fell, a certain number had a moment of repentance and did not in consequence fall as low as the others. Later on, these fallen spirits took up their abode on a high, desolate, and wholly inaccessible mountain whose site at the time of the Deluge became a sea, the Black Sea, I think. They were permitted to exercise their evil influence upon men in proportion as the latter strayed further from God. After the Deluge they disappeared from that region, and were confined to the air. They will not be cast into Hell before the last day.

    I saw Cain's descendants becoming more and more godless and sensual. They settled further and further up that mountain ridge where were the fallen spirits. Those spirits took possession of many of the women, ruled them com-

    pletely, and taught them all sorts of seductive arts. Their children were very large. They possessed a quickness, an aptitude for everything, and they gave themselves up entirely to the wicked spirits as their instruments. And so arose on this mountain and spread far around, a wicked race which by violence and seduction sought to entangle Sethi's posterity likewise in their own corrupt ways. Then God declared to Noe His intention to send the Deluge. During the building of the ark, Noe had to suffer terribly from those people.

    I have seen many things connected with the race of giants. They could with ease carry enormous stones high up the mountain, they could accomplish the most stupendous feats. They could walk straight up trees and walls just as I have seen others possessed by the devil doing. They could effect the most wonderful things, they could do whatever they wished; but all was pure jugglery and delusion due to the agency of the demon. It is for that reason that I have such horror of every species of jugglery and fortune-telling. These people could form all kinds of images out of stone and metal; but of the knowledge of God they had no longer a trace. They sought their gods in the creatures around them. I have seen them scratch up a stone, form it into an extravagant image, and then adore it. They worshipped also a frightful animal and all kinds of ignoble things. They knew all things, they could see all things, they were skilled in the preparing of poisons, they practiced sorcery and every species of wickedness. The women invented music. I saw them going around among the better tribes trying to seduce them to their own abominations. They had no dwelling houses, no cities, but they raised massive round towers of shining stone. Under those towers were little structures leading into great caverns wherein they carried on their horrible wickedness. From the roofs of these structures, the surrounding country could be seen, and by mounting up into the towers and

    looking through tubes, one could see far into the distance. But it was not like looking through tubes made to bring distant objects into view. The power of the tubes to which 1 here allude, was effected by satanic agency. They that looked through them could see where the other tribes were settled. Then they marched against them, overcame them, and lawlessly carried all before them. That same spirit of lawlessness they exercised everywhere. I saw them sacrificing children by burying them alive in the earth. God overthrew that mountain at the time of the Deluge.

    Henoch, Noe's ancestor, opposed that wicked race by his teachings. He wrote much. Henoch was a very good man and one very grateful to God, In many parts of the open fields, he raised altars of stone and there the fruits of the earth flourished. He gave thanks to God and offered sacrifice to Him. Chiefly in his family was religion preserved and handed down to Noe. Henoch was taken up to Paradise. There he waits at the entrance gate, whence with another (Elias) he will come again before the last day.

    Cham's descendants likewise had similar relations with the evil spirits after the Deluge, and from such connection sprang so many demoniacs and necromancers, so many mighty ones of the world, so many great, wild, daring men.

    Semiramis herself was the offspring of demoniacs, consequently she was apt at everything save the working out of her salvation.

    Later on, there arose another people esteemed as gods by the heathens. The women that first allowed themselves to be ruled by evil spirits were fully conscious of the fact, though others were ignorant of it. These women had it (the principle of possession) in them like flesh and blood, like original sin.

    NOE AND HIS POSTERITY. HOM AND DSEMSCHID, LEADERS OF THE PEOPLE

    I saw Noe, a simple-hearted old man, clothed in a long white garment. He was walking about in an orchard and pruning the trees with a crooked bone knife. A cloud hovered over him and in it was a human Figure. Noe fell on his knees, I saw that he was, then and there, interiorly instructed upon God's design to destroy mankind, and he was commanded to build an ark. I saw that Noe grew sad at the announcement, and that he prayed for the punishment to be averted. He did not begin the work at once. Again the Lord appeared to him, twice in succession, commanding him to begin the building, otherwise he should perish with the rest of mankind. At last, I saw Noe removing with all his family to the country in which Zoroaster, the Shining Star, subsequently dwelt. Noe settled in a high, woody, solitary region where he and his numerous followers lived under tents. Here he raised an altar and offered sacrifice to the Lord. Neither Noe nor any of his family built permanent houses, because they put faith in the prophecy of the Deluge. But the godless nations around laid massive foundations, marked off courts, and erected all kinds of buildings designed to resist the inroads of time and the attacks of an enemy.

    There were frightful deeds upon the earth in those days. Men delivered themselves up to all kinds of wickedness, even the most unnatural. They plundered one another and carried off whatever suited them best, they laid waste homes and fields, they kidnapped women and maidens. In proportion to their increase in numbers, was the wickedness of Noe's posterity. They even robbed and insulted Noe himself. They had not fallen into this state of base degradation from want of civilization. They were not wild and barbarous; rather, they lived commodiously and had well-ordered households—but they were deeply imbued

    with wickedness. They practiced the most shameful idolatry, everyone making his own god of whatever pleased him best. By diabolical arts, they sought to seduce Noe's immediate family. Mosoch, the son of Japhet and grandson of Noe, was thus corrupted after he had, while working in the field, taken from them a poisonous beverage which intoxicated him. It was not wine, but the juice of a plant which they were accustomed to drink in small quantities during their work, and whose leaves and fruit they chewed. Mosoch became the father of a son, who was named Horn.

    When the child was born, Mosoch begged his brother Thubal to take it, and thus hide his guilt. Thubal did so out of fraternal affection. The child, with the stalks and sprouts of a certain viscous root, was laid by his mother before Thubal's tent. She hoped thereby to acquire a right over his inheritance; but the Deluge was already at hand, and so her plans were fruitless. Thubal took the boy and had him reared in his family without betraying his origin. And so it happened in this way that the child was taken into the ark. Thubal called the boy Horn, the name of the root whose sprouts lay near him as the only sign. The child was not nourished with milk, but with the same root. If that plant is allowed to grow up straight, it will reach the height of a man; but when il creeps along the ground, it sends up shoots like the asparagus, hard with tender tops, It is used as food and as a substitute for milk. The root is bulbous, and from it rises a crown of a few brown leaves. Its stem is tolerably thick and the pith is used as meal, cooked like pap or spread in thin layers and baked. Wherever it thrives, it grows luxuriantly and covers leagues of ground. I saw it in the ark.

    It was long before the ark was completed, for Noe often discontinued it for years at a time. Three times did God warn him to proceed with it. Each time Noe would engage workmen, recommence and again discontinue in the hope that God would relent. But at last the work was finished.

    I saw that in the ark, as in the Cross, there were four kinds of wood: palm, olive, cedar, and cypress. I saw the wood felled and hewed upon the spot, and Noe bearing it himself upon his shoulders to the place of building, just as Jesus afterward carried the wood of His Cross. The spot chosen for the construction of the ark was a hill surrounded by a valley. First the bottom was put in.

    The ark was rounded in the back and the keel, shaped like a trough, was smeared with pitch. It had two stories supported on hollow posts, which stood one above another. These posts were not round trunks of trees; they were in oval sections filled with a white pith which became fibrous toward the center. The trunk was knotty, or furrowed, and the great leaves grew around it without branches. (Probably a species of palm,) I saw the workmen punching the pith out with a tool. All other trees were cut into thin planks. When Noe had carried all the materials to the appointed spot and arranged them in order, the building was begun. The bottom was put in and pitched, the first row of posts raised, and the holes in which they stood filled up with pitch. Then came the second floor with another row of posts for the third floor, and then the roof. The spaces between the posts were filled in with brown and yellow laths placed crosswise, the holes and chinks being stuffed with a kind of wool found on certain trees and plants, and a white moss that grows very abundantly around some trees. Then all was pitched inside and outside. The roof was rounded. The entrance between the two windows was in the center of one side, a little more than halfway up. In the middle of the roof likewise was a square aperture. When the ark had been entirely covered with pitch, it shone like a mirror in the sun. Noe went on working alone and for a long time at the different compartments for the animals, as all were to be separate. Two passages extended through the middle of the ark, and back

    in the oval part, concealed by hangings, stood a wooden altar, the table of which was semicircular. A little in the front of the altar was a pan of coals. This was their fire. Right and left, were spaces partitioned off for sleeping apartments. All kinds of chests and utensils were carried into the ark, and numerous seeds, plants, and shrubs were put into earth around the walls, which were soon covered with verdure. 1 saw something like vines carried in, and on them large yellow grapes, the bunches as long as one's arm.

    No words can express what Noe endured from the malice and ill will of the workmen during the whole time that the ark was building. They mocked him, they insulted him in every way, they called him a fool. He paid them well in cattle, but that did not prevent their reviling him. No one knew why he was building the ark, therefore did they ridicule him. When all was finished, 1 saw Noe giving thanks to God, who then appeared to him. He told him to take a reed pipe and call all the animals from the four corners of the globe. The nearer the day of chastisement approached, the darker grew the heavens. Frightful anxiety took possession of the whole earth; the sun no longer showed his face, and the roar of the thunder was unceasingly heard. 1 saw Noe going a short distance north, south, east, and west, and blowing upon his reed pipe. The animals came flocking at the sound and entered the ark in order, two by two, male and female. They went in by a plank laid from the entrance to the ground. When all were safe inside, the plank also was hoisted in. The largest animals, white elephants and camels, went in first. They were restless as at the approach of a storm, and it took several days for them all to enter. The birds flew in through the skylight and perched under the roof on poles and in cages, while the waterfowl went into the bottom of the vessel. The land animals were in the middle story. Of such as are slaughtered, there were seven couples.

    The ark, lying there by itself on the top of the hill, shone with a bluish light. At a distance, it looked as if it were descending from the clouds. And now the time for the Deluge drew nigh. Noe had already announced it to his family. He took with him into the ark Sem, Cham, and Japhet with their wives and their children. There were in the ark grandsons from fifty to eighty years old with their children small and large. All that had labored at its construction and who were good and free from idolatry, entered with Noe. There were over one hundred people in the ark, and they were necessary to give daily food to the animals and to clean after them. I must say, for I always see it so, that Sem's, Cham's and Japhet's children all went into the ark. There were many little boys and girls in it, in fact all of Noe's family that were good. Holy Scripture mentions only three of Adam's children, Cain, Abel, and Seth; and yet I see many others among them, and I always see them in pairs, boys and girls. And so too, in / Peter 3:20, only eight souls are mentioned as saved in the ark; viz., the four ancestral couples by whom, after the Deluge, the earth was to be peopled. I also saw Horn in the ark. The child was fastened by a skin into a bark cradle formed like a trough. I saw many infants cradled in a similar way, floating on the waters of the Deluge.

    When the ark rose on the waters, when crowds of people upon the surrounding mountains and in the high trees were weeping and lamenting, when the waters were covered with the floating bodies of the drowned and with uprooted trees, Noe and his family were already safe inside. Before he and his wife, his three sons and their wives entered the ark, he once more implored God's mercy. When all had entered, Noe drew in the plank and made fast the door. He left outside near relatives and their families who, during the building of the ark, had separated from him. Then burst forth a fearful tempest. The lightnings played in fiery columns, the rains fell in tor-

    rents, and the hill upon which the ark stood soon became an island. The misery was great, so great that I trust it was the means of many a soul's salvation. I saw a devil, black and hideous, with pointed jaws and a long tail, going to and fro through the tempest and tempting men to despair. Toads and serpents sought a hiding place in the crevices of the ark. Flies and vermin I saw not. They came into existence later to torment men.

    I saw Noe offering sacrifice in the ark upon an altar covered with red over which was a white cloth. In an arched chest were preserved the bones of Adam. During prayer and sacrifice, Noe laid them on the altar. I saw on the altar, likewise, the Chalice of the Last Supper which, during the building of the ark, had been brought to Noe by three figures in long white garments. They looked like the three men that announced to Abraham the birth of a son. They came from a city that was destroyed at the time of the Deluge. They addressed Noe as one whose fame had reached them, and told him that he should take with him into the ark a mysterious something that they gave him, in order that it might escape the waters of the Deluge. The mysterious thing was that Chalice. In it lay a grain of wheat, large as a sunflower seed, and a vine branch. Noe stuck both into a yellow apple and put it into the Chalice. The Chalice had no cover, for the branch was to grow out of it. After the dispersion of men at the building of the Tower of Babel, I saw that Chalice in the possession of one of Sem's descendants in the country of Semiramis. He was the ancestor of the Samanenses, who were established at Canaan by Melchisedech. Hither they took the Chalice.

    I saw the ark driving over the waters, and dead bodies floating around. It rested upon a high rocky peak of a mountain chain far to the east of Syria, and there it remained for a long time. I saw that land was already appearing. It looked like mud covered with a greenish mold.

    Immediately after the Deluge, fish and shellfish began to be eaten. Afterward, as people multiplied, they ate bread and birds. They planted gardens, and the soil was so fruitful that the wheat which they sowed produced ears as large as those of maize. The root from which Horn received his name was also planted. Noe's tent stood on the spot where, at a later period, was that of Abraham. In the plain and in the surrounding country, Noe's sons had their tents.

    I saw the cursing of Cham. But Sem and Japhet received from Noe on their knees the Blessing. It was delivered to them with ceremonies similar to those used by Abraham when giving over the same Blessing to Isaac. I saw the curse pronounced by Noe upon Cham moving toward the latter like a black cloud and obscuring him. His skin lost its whiteness, he grew darker. His sin was the sin of sacrilege, the sin of one who would forcibly enter the Ark of the Covenant. I saw a most corrupt race descend from Cham and sink deeper and deeper in darkness. I see that the black, idolatrous, stupid nations are the descendants of Cham. Their color is due, not to the rays of the sun, but to the dark source whence those degraded races sprang.


    This blog post was a reflection of Catholic thought on the Curse of Ham, going back 200 years.  In the next post on this topic, I will cover the matter over a greater span, predating Jesus Christ's birth.  The material I have provided here should be sufficient for today.
    .........................

    Before some audiences not even the possession of the exactest knowledge will make it easy for what we say to produce conviction. For argument based on knowledge implies instruction, and there are people whom one cannot instruct.  - Aristotle

    Offline LaramieHirsch

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2559
    • Reputation: +864/-181
    • Gender: Male
      • h
    Re: Curse of Ham
    « Reply #9 on: November 13, 2018, 09:10:56 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • Race Issues 1b: Catholic Thoughts On The Curse of Ham Extending Into Antiquity

    In my last post on this topic, I covered the thoughts of Catholics in the last 200 years in regards to the Curse of Ham.  I highlighted a religious sister, a priest, a bishop, a pope, and a mystic.
      
    These views, liberals correctly assert, were utilized by the Trans-Atlantic slave trade (powered by Jewish and Islamic forces, might I add) to enslave black people from Africa.

    Liberals are quick to settle this matter.  That is how the Left handles this kind of a negative issue.  They simply decide to deny the Curse of Ham--just as feminists relish their denial of the Curse of Eve.  Pretending that it never really happened and delegitimizing the narrative is the modus operandi of the Left.

    Yet, if this matter is settled, and the idea of blacks descending from a cursed line of Ham is satisfactorily repudiated, then why are there so many books on Amazon.com vying to discredit the Ham Curse?  

    The reason why is because the Curse of Ham not only explains the origin of black people, but it also tacks on the idea that these people are destined to be slaves.

    The Left cannot stand this dilemma--even though the Catholics have solved it by decrying slavery as a sin.  Yes, the Catholics have the solution for the angst of black people and liberals--and that solution is that slaves should not be kept.  As a matter of fact, it is a corporal work of mercy to ransom a captive.  The slave problem is answered by the most merciful institution on the face of the Earth instituted by Jesus Christ: the Catholic Church.

    Nevertheless, leftists and cuckservatives do their best to disqualify this narrative, using whatever perceived contradictions they can find within the religious literature.  Such people will construct a careful Biblical exegesis, going to great pains to attribute plain statements in Scriptures to mean something symbolic or spiritual. And yet, very often, such leftist Diversitykult writers by all appearances don't seem to even believe in the Biblical narrative, as they typically hold up the Bible as a myth.

    My primary interest in this series is not to justify the slavery of black people.  I want to explain them.  We should study the Ham Curse, not because we should be finding a way to justifiably treat blacks like garbage, but to have a keener idea of the origin of different men and races.  
    That is my purpose here.

    And throughout history, we can see that there has been a consistent belief in the idea that Ham was the progenitor of the black races.

    Christendom's Belief In the Ham Curse

    Let us go back to the time of the Crusades and work back from there.

    Bar Hebraeus, Syrian Christian scholar (mid-1200s):

    “‘And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father and showed [it] to his two brothers.’ That is…that Canaan was cursed and not Ham, and with the very curse he became black and the blackness was transmitted to his descendants…. And he said, ‘Cursed be Canaan! A servant of servants shall he be to his brothers.’"

    Ibn al-Tayyib, Arabic Christian scholar, Baghdad (died 1043AD):

    “The curse of Noah affected the posterity of Canaan who were killed by Joshua son of Nun. At the moment of the curse, Canaan’s body became black and the blackness spread out among them.”

    Ishodad of Merv, Syrian Christian bishop of Hedhatha (9th century):

    “instantly, by the force of the curse… his face and entire body became black. This is the black color which has persisted in his descendants.”

    Eutychius, Alexandrian Melkite patriarch (mid-900s AD):

    “Cursed be Ham and may he be a servant to his brothers… He himself and his descendants, who are the Egyptians, the Negroes, the Ethiopians and (it is said) the Barbari.”

    Cave of Treasures, Eastern Christian, often attributed to St. Ephrem (4th Century):

    "When Noah awoke…he cursed him and said: "Cursed be Ham and may he be slave to his brothers" … and he became a slave, he and his lineage, namely the Egyptians, the Abyssinians, and the Indians. Indeed, Ham lost all sense of shame and he became black and was called shameless all the days of his life, forever."

    St. Ephraem the Syrian (ca. 306 – 373): 

    "When Noah awoke and was told what Canaan did. . .Noah said, ‘Cursed be Canaan and may God make his face black,’ and immediately the face of Canaan changed; so did of his father Ham, and their white faces became black and dark and their color changed.”

    Saint Jerome (347-420AD):

    "Chus in Hebrew means Ethiopian, that is, black and dark, one who has a soul as black as his body.” 

    Also Saint Jerome, but from his work, Against Jovinianus, Book II:

    "You must either say that the sons of Noah and Noah for whose sake they were delivered were of unequal merit, or you must place the accursed Ham in the same rank as his father because he was delivered with him from the flood." 

    Origen (c. 185-c. 254), from Homilies on Genesis 16:1:

    "For the Egyptians are prone to a degenerate life and quickly sink to every slavery of the vices. Look at the origin of the race and you will discover that their father Cham, who had laughed at his father’s nakedness, deserved a judgment of this kind, that his son Chanaan should be a servant to his brothers, in which case the condition of bondage would prove the wickedness of his conduct. Not without merit, therefore, does the discolored posterity imitate the ignobility of the race."
     
    Early Church Fathers: "There's More To This Story"

    In yesterday's post about this topic, I rhetorically asked some questions.  

    Is there nothing more to the Ham Curse than what the Bible has to say about it?  Are Holy Scriptures the be-all-end-all authority on what happened that day between Noah and his progeny?  Could more be happening than what is reported in the Bible?

    Early Church fathers and others thought so.  The early Christians believed that Ham's descendants inherited either all or a part of the Curse of Ham.  

    Take, for example, Justin Martyr (d. 165).  This Christian apologist infers that the curse actually originated with Ham and trickled down to his descendants:

    "The spirit of prophecy would not curse the son that had been by God blessed along with [his brothers]. But since the punishment of the sin would cleave to the whole descent of the son that mocked at his father's nakedness, he made the curse originate with his son."

    Pachomious (d. 346), the founder of Christian cenobitic monasticism, presupposes that Ham was cursed alongside his descendants.  And so, we are allowed to conclude that it is more than just Canaan who is cursed.  

    Ambrose (d. 397), bishop of Milan, concluded the same thing as Justin Martyr did, sourcing the curse to Ham, not just Canaan:  

    "he who mocked [Noah] for being naked, himself remained bound by the reproach of everlasting shame."

    And to throw the entire Ham Curse narrative for a loop, there is this: Marque, foremost scholar among the Samaritans of his time (4th century) stated the following:

    "When Kush saw the nakedness of his father, he was cursed and he wore darkness--he and all his descendants forever." 

    Poor Cush.  So now we're pulling him into this family squabble. 

    Indeed, world-famous Josephus--influential, albeit not a Christian--stated that it was not only Canaan who was cursed, but all of Ham's progeny, and that the curse particularly stuck to the Canaanites.

    According to David Goldberg--who has done more research on this very specific topic than anyone that you will find--is unsuprised by Josephus' conclusion: 

    Exegetes who understood that Ham was cursed assumed that all of Ham's descendants inherited the curse--that is, Egypt, Kush, Put, and Canaan, and not just the line of Canaan as the Bible would have it.  Indeed, this notion is common in patristic and rabbinic literature, especially in regard to Egypt.

    The early Church Fathers agreed that there was more to the story of the Curse of Ham.  Who knows what additional sources could be cited in this cursory study, had the Library of Alexandria not been burned to the ground by invading Muslims.

    The Curse's Notoriety Before Jesus Christ

    First, I will bring up the pre-Christian source.  That is, the now-internet-famous Book of Enoch.  And specifically, I am referring to 1 Enoch, Chapters 85 - 90, which are called "The Animal Apocalypse," which Goldberg adequately describes:

    The Animal Apocalypse was so named because it recounts biblical history from Adam onward, only substituting various animals for biblical characters or groups, a sort of ancient Animal Farm, to use Bryan's apt analogy to George Orwell's novel.  The relevant text reads as follows:

    "The white bull which had become a man came out of the vessel and the three bulls with him, and one of those three bulls was white like that bull, and one of them was red as blood, and one black."

    The white bull that came out of the vessel (i.e., the ark) is Noah and the three bulls with him are Shem, Ham, and Japeth.  Matthew Black and Siegbert Uhlig believe that the author means to describe the different skin colors of the three races that populated the world after the flood.  They think that, although elsewhere in the Animal Apocalypse colors of animals are meant symbolically, in this instance they realistically indicate skin color: the Semites are white, the Japhetites red, and the Hamites black.


    Even before we read the description of Noah's sons in "The Animal Apocalypse" of Enoch, we learn that Cain is also depicted as black--just as Venerable Catherine Anne Emmerich testified from her vision, which I discussed in yesterday's post.

    The Book of Enoch is a 2nd Century BC pre-Christian book that most Christians were familiar with, as it was extremely influential:

    It influenced not only later Jewish apocrypha, but has left its imprint on the New Testament and the works of the early Fathers. The canonical Epistle of St. Jude, in verses 14, 15, explicitly quotes from the Book of Henoch; the citation is found in the Ethiopic version in verses 9 and 4 of the first chapter. There are probable traces of the Henoch literature in other portions of the New Testament.

    Passing to the patristic writers, the Book of Henoch enjoyed a high esteem among them, mainly owing to the quotation in Jude. The so-called Epistle of Barnabas twice cites Henoch as Scripture. Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, Origen, and even St. Augustine suppose the work to be a genuine one of the patriarch. But in the fourth century the Henoch writings lost credit and ceased to be quoted. After an allusion by an author of the beginning of the ninth century, they disappear from view.


    Due to its celebrity in antiquity, no less by the Savior Himself, the work remains relevant in such a discussion as this.

    The Curse's Notoriety During Christ's Life

    And now it comes down to it.  How can we forget, particularly during the Christmas octave, about The Three Wise Men?  How could it be forgotten that the Three Magi--travelling from far away countries to visit the infant Christ Child--represented the three tribes of men who stemmed from Noah?

    The Three Wise Men--Caspar, Malchior, and Balthazar--in coming to see the Savior of mankind, serve as a sort of type.  In them, we see the divided Gentiles who were separated in the beginning after the Flood.  They come together once more as the representatives of all of us.  And it was Jesus Christ who was capable of achieving such a reunion.

    Among them, according to legend, is an Ethiopian.  This magi, it is said, is presaged in the 67th Psalm: 

    Ambassadors shall come out of Egypt: Ethiopia shall soon stretch out her hands to God.  Sing to God, ye kingdoms of the earth: sing ye to the Lord: Sing ye to God, who mounteth above the heaven of heavens, to the east. Behold he will give to his voice the voice of power: Give ye glory to God for Israel, his magnificence, and his power is in the clouds.

    And so, the coming together of the Magi was a significant event.  Their reunion gave us all a Christmastime glimmer of a world of men who share the same blood and who are all siblings in the same, single family under Adam and Eve, our first parents.  

    As E. Michael Jones would say, the Magi had the wisdom to look at the heavens.  When they saw a Logos in the stars, they conformed their lives to that order.  They had the courage to follow that star to Bethlehem.  They had the intellect, and then the will, to follow the Logos in the sky to the Logos Incarnate.  And when tempted and instructed by Herod to turn in the Savior of Mankind, they refused to cooperate with him, and they turned to go home on a different path.

    One day, either in this life or the next, this miracle among the tribes of men will manifest itself once more.  When that day comes, after men have drunken enough of their own blood and when the world tires of being lashed by the whip of punishing angels, men will be brought together one last time before the End.

    But until that time, as Lloyd Thompson once said:

    "We depend almost entirely on the surviving remarks of a few long-dead people, none of which remarks was made in response to any carefully-worded question put to them by us."  
    .........................

    Before some audiences not even the possession of the exactest knowledge will make it easy for what we say to produce conviction. For argument based on knowledge implies instruction, and there are people whom one cannot instruct.  - Aristotle

    Offline LaramieHirsch

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2559
    • Reputation: +864/-181
    • Gender: Male
      • h
    Re: Curse of Ham
    « Reply #10 on: November 13, 2018, 09:15:16 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • Race Issues 1c: The Curse of Ham - What To Do With It?

    I endeavored to begin a series on Ham, son of Noah, that was genealogical in its spirit, with the intention of pointing out the supernatural segmenting of the tribes of men.

    And so, this week, I have covered the historical Judeo-Christian theme that Ham, son of Noah, became the progenitor of the family of black people. I began with strictly Catholic thoughts on the matter, extending to the 19th Century, and I then pursued this thread into antiquity, citing the Christians of the very first centuries after Christ.

    The purpose of this series is not to study the various physical, emotional, or mental features of blacks. It is neither the purpose of this series to justify any ill will towards blacks, nor is the purpose to encourage ethnocentrism or Kinism.

    Accepting tradition leads to the most obvious conclusion: that all people are cousins, to one degree or another, in one family under our first parents, Adam and Eve. We are not aliens to one another. We are not separate species--as angels are to humans. We are special creatures that are above the beasts. And so, whatever signigicant benchmarks happen to men, God has had a hand in it.

    For what is the alternative to this view? Shall we consider Darwinism?


    Origin Of The Species 

    Simultaneous belief in a creation through the vehicle of evolution is not merely "a philosophical slippery slope," but a direct train ride into a pit of darkness.  For if we are to believe in a gradual origin of the species--if the major phenotypes of men are chosen based on natural selection--then what we are dealing with in terms of mankind is not a human family, but a vast set of subspecies.

    Indeed, with evolution, we can now begin relating to men the same way we refer to other organisms in the zoological tree. Consider Darwin's take on this:

    "Our naturalist would then perhaps turn to geographical distribution, and he would probably declare that those forms must be distinct species, which differ not only in appearance, but are fitted for hot, as well as damp or dry countries, and for the arctic regions. He might appeal to the fact that no species in the group next to man- namely, the Quadrumana, can resist a low temperature, or any considerable change of climate; and that the species which come nearest to man have never been reared to maturity, even under the temperate climate of Europe. He would be deeply impressed with the fact, first noticed by Agassiz,* that the different races of man are distributed over the world in the same zoological provinces, as those inhabited by undoubtedly distinct species and genera of mammals. This is manifestly the case with the Australian, Mongolian, and Negro races of man; in a less well-marked manner with the Hottentots; but plainly with the Papuans and Malays, who are separated, as Mr. Wallace has shewn, by nearly the same line which divides the great Malayan and Australian zoological provinces." 

    Should survival of the fittest be the order of the day, then we have the duty to promote the fittest and discourage the less fit. If we are to believe in man's evolution, then verily, we should do our utmost to engineer a master race of human beings who hold the maximum potential for attaining salvation, unlike lesser sub-species in the zoological tree of mankind who are too clumsy to achieve it.

    And thus, you have racial supremacy. And with racial supremacy comes the process of weeding out the weak and promoting the strong, which is not a Christian philosophy whatsoever. 


    The Creation of Ethiopians 

    Though the Curse of Ham has been a belief among Christians, it is, of course, apocraphal.  There is no other place in the Scriptures themselves that alludes to a possible curse on black people.  Of course, neither do the Holy Scriptures go into any detail about the antediluvian civilization of men, the full story behind the race of ancient giants, dinosaurs, the cosmos, the shape and nature of subatomic particles--and an infinite amount of other topics. 

    Like many facts and teachings in Christendom, this line of thought--the story of the Curse of Ham upon all of his descendants--has been passed through tradition.

    How does a black person cope with this, if true?

    For starters, when it comes to this matter, God Himself makes no official proclamations about the descendants of Ham.  The "Ethiopians," as blacks were once called, are not given any special instructions, nor are they told by the Almighty what to think of themselves. 

    God does not tell the rest of humanity that it is their duty or right to enslave these people.  He does not command that the rest of the tribes of men treat this group like pariahs. He does not even forbid the gentiles from intermarrying with them, should they so choose. 

    Without a doubt, the Almighty foresaw that black men would have enough of a social stigma, due mostly to their skin color. These people, in the very first days, felt outcast enough to travel so very far away from Mesopatamia, beyond the desert, all the way to Cush--the land between the cataracts of the Nile. 

    However, whatever the popular opinion has been in the past, the Catholic Church has sought to establish the right and proper way for all men to coexist.

    If one is to follow the tradition of Christianity, then it will not do to cover one's ears and pretend this chapter in history does not exist.  This is the attitude of a modernist who refuses to believe in the "Curse of Eden," when God told men they would have to labor among thorns, and women would have to be subservient. 

    What is important is having a correct and holy perspective on "the creation of Ethiopians." 

    God fashioned men, and He knew what we would and would not be able to handle. He knew that black Africans would be able to carry on in spite of their circumstance.  In fact, He wanted these people to be challenged, else He wouldn't have allowed it.  And, in meeting their challenges, it is possible for this tribe of people to achieve unique graces that others might not have a chance to try for.

    Had God thought otherwise, would He have allowed men to segment in this way? He knows best. Not only this, but there are lessons to be learned when two people come together in spite of differences. Consider the Catechism of the Catholic Church:
    "On coming into the world, man is not equipped with everything he needs for developing his bodily and spiritual life. He needs others. Differences appear tied to age, physical abilities, intellectual or moral aptitudes, the benefits derived from social commerce, and the distribution of wealth. The "talents" are not distributed equally. These differences belong to God's plan, who wills that each receive what he needs from others, and that those endowed with particular "talents" share the benefits with those who need them. These differences encourage and often oblige persons to practice generosity, kindness, and sharing of goods; they foster the mutual enrichment of cultures."

    -CCC #1936, 1937 
    The "Ethiopians" have offered the world much, and vice versa. As a matter of fact, they were some of the first gentiles to convert to Christianity. And as far as America is concerned, the country would be far poorer without their physical, material, and cultural contributions.

    If slavery ever was an issue, it should not be now. Erroneous were the efforts, on the part of 19th Century slave traders and the early Mohammedans, to justify their commerce by citing the Curse of Ham.  Their rationalization was not a holy perspective on "the creation of Ethiopians."

    Blacks should not believe themselves to be a race of men consigned to perpetual slavery in this life. For, as I stated in my first post in this series, the Catholic Church has condemned the practice. The saints condemn slavery, Pope Gregory XVI condemns it in an apostolic letter, any Catholics supporting slavery have been repudiated, and slavery is known to be an excommunicable sin.

    Furthermore, if there ever was any kind of a spiritual weight on the children of Ham, it is lifted with the Sacrifice of our Lord. With the coming of Jesus Christ, the distinctions between the Jew and gentile, freeman and slave, men and women, are lifted. We are all sons of the same Divine Father.


    Conclusion 

    A sober look back at traditional Christian history, with a right and holy perspective, can yield better fruits than the historical revisionism of today's modernists. 

    Belief in evolution is a horrible trap in this kind of an argument, and ignoring this part of mankind's story is a blind approach to the past.


    Christian tradition holds Ham responsible for the creation of black people. Enraged at his son, Noah appears to have initiated a curse upon his own descendants, and it has stuck ever since.  God did not initiate Noah's curse.  Noah did.  The builder of the Ark is the fall guy.

    Yet, for some purpose, God must have had some kind of a hand in the transformation of men.  Mortal men have no magical power.  A man cannot wave his hand and transform the characteristics of other men.  God must have been involved to some kind of a degree.

    The Holy Spirit can infuse grace in real and valuable objects, as well as individuals, couples, families, ethnicities, and countries.  So, what was His aim?  Why would God create a line of men so different from the rest of His human family? 

    The Catechism states that "benefits are derived from social commerce," that talents "are not distributed equally," and that differences between men oblige them to practice generosity and kindness, with a mutual enrichment of one another.

    Therefore, I say to black people everywhere that their legend has endowed them with gifts and graces that can enrich the world, and it would behoove them all to conquer their weaknesses, as we all must, and meet the with the other nations and tribes of men in generosity and good will--just as the rest of mankind is obliged to do for them and each other. 

    In the end, together, the nations shall walk in the light of God's glory in His City:

    And the kings of the earth shall bring their glory and honour into it.  And the gates thereof shall not be shut by day: for there shall be no night there.  And they shall bring the glory and honour of the nations into it.  There shall not enter into it any thing defiled, or that worketh abomination or maketh a lie, but they that are written in the book of life of the Lamb.Revelations 21:24-27
    .........................

    Before some audiences not even the possession of the exactest knowledge will make it easy for what we say to produce conviction. For argument based on knowledge implies instruction, and there are people whom one cannot instruct.  - Aristotle


    Anonymous

    • Guest
    Re: Curse of Ham
    « Reply #11 on: November 13, 2018, 10:08:49 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • The curse of Ham might be a curse of blacks and Arabs. (Today would be such people who remain as pagans, infidels, idolaters, and adherents to

    The Bible states in Habacuc 3:7
    The Catholic Haydock Bible's commentaries on that verse:
    Is it any wonder that The International Jew, who is the ancient enemy of the Lord Jesus Christ, is orchestrating the invasion of Europe by blacks and Arabs as to wipe out any last remnant of Christendom and the very race (white caucasoids) who were blessed by God for having spread the Gospels to the four corners of the globe?

    Of course, any black or Arab who has water baptism into Jesus Christ and lives the Catholic Faith has this curse removed, but, although they are healed through baptism, the scars of the curse remain, which can make them susceptible to their old ways. Scar tissue on healed wounds are more susceptible to damage.  Just look at Haiti. Just look at the inner cities in the U.S.

    Thank you. That was helpful.

    I can definitely believe that there is some type of curse upon the blacks. That would explain why they are born with such a skin color and other physical features (also, intellectual features it seems, considering the level of their civilization, as a whole). 

    Of course, I believe and hope that blacks can also be saved in Christ Jesus, and thus be heirs of Heaven, which is what ultimately matters. The Church has canonized blacks in the past so we know this is possible. Their glorified bodies in Heaven will no longer be black though, but radiant and beautiful.

    Also, I have good reasons to believe that Jesus was White, that He was of Caucasoid race. I'm doing further research on that. 

    Anonymous

    • Guest
    Re: Curse of Ham
    « Reply #12 on: November 13, 2018, 11:47:37 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Some of Laramie's information comes from this earlier thread about the curse: https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/anne-catherine-emmerich-the-curse-of-ham/

    You could go through that thread and ignore just about every post not by me and you wouldn't be missing out on much.

    Offline rum

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 749
    • Reputation: +367/-260
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Curse of Ham
    « Reply #13 on: November 13, 2018, 11:48:20 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I forgot this was in the anonymous section. That's me above.

    Offline Quid Retribuam Domino

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 487
    • Reputation: +264/-354
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Curse of Ham
    « Reply #14 on: November 14, 2018, 12:07:24 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • It is really the curse of Chanaan, youngest son of Cham. Cham did the evil act and the curse was put on his son. Loss of the land of Chanaan, and to be a servant, seemingly to all, was visited upon Chanaan who apparently drew Cham's attention to Noe's nakedness and ridiculed it.  Nought to do with blacks or Arabs. Freedom comes with adherence to Jesus Christ. And of course Jesus Himself was to become a Servant.

    From the Douay Rheims Bible, Genesis 9:

    [21]And (Noe) drinking of the wine was made drunk, and was uncovered in his tent. [22]Which when Cham the father of Chanaan had seen, to wit, that his father's nakedness was uncovered, he told it to his two brethren without. [23] But Sem and Japheth put a cloak upon their shoulders, and going backward, covered the nakedness of their father: and their faces were turned away, and they saw not their father's nakedness. [24] And Noe awaking from the wine, when he had learned what his younger son had done to him, [25] He said: Cursed be Chanaan, a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren.
    [21] "Drunk": Noe by the judgment of the fathers was not guilty of sin, in being overcome by wine: because he knew not the strength of it.
    [23] "Covered the nakedness": Thus, as St. Gregory takes notice L. 35; Moral. c. 22, we ought to cover the nakedness, that is, the sins, of our spiritual parents and superiors.
    [25] "Cursed be Chanaan": The curses, as well as the blessings, of the patriarchs, were prophetical: And this in particular is here recorded by Moses, for the children of Israel, who were to possess the land of Chanaan. But why should Chanaan be cursed for his father's faults? The Hebrews answer, that he being then a boy, was the first that saw his grandfather's nakedness, and told his father Cham of it; and joined with him in laughing at it: which drew upon him, rather than upon the rest of the children of Cham, this prophetical curse.
    [26] And he said: Blessed be the Lord God of Sem, be Chanaan his servant. [27]May God enlarge Japheth, and may he dwell in the tents of Sem, and Chanaan be his servant. [28] And Noe lived after the flood three hundred and fifty years: [29]And all his days were in the whole nine hundred and fifty years: and he died.

    Yes, but isn't it possible that the blacks and Madianites (Arabs) in Habacuc 3:7 are descended from Chanaan? Considering the events in Book of Habacuc 3 came long after the Book of Genesis 9, they could still be biologically descended from Chaanan and, variably, took on his phenotype (physical and mental disposition) that might have been altered from the curse and passed down through the generations.

    Arabs who aren't baptized aren't much more civilized than blacks who aren't baptized, and they're a very temperamental & violent people not unlike blacks. Arab Muslims even kill their own daughters who find disfavor from their fathers. It's an epidemic.

    It was the British empire that civilized the Arabs, and it was oil that enriched them. It wasn't by their own genius. If not for the Brits and oil reserves throughout the ME, they'd still be riding around on camels warring with other rival tribes ... butchering, raping and stealing, not unlike the Native Siberians (ostensibly called "Americans") did to each other long before Europeans colonized the Americas.

    The black disposition needs no explanation. Again, look at Rwanda 1994 or Haiti since they killed and kicked out the civilized French, and reverted back to their African demonic spirituality of voodoo.
    From the woman came the beginning of sin, and by her we all die. ~ Ecclesiasticus 25:33

    International Women's Day is a day we all celebrate Eve's rebellion at the Tree and our plummet into sin.

     

    Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16