Author Topic: Curse of Ham (Read 2655 times)

Dolores · « **on:** December 04, 2014, 10:09:54 AM »

This story from Genesis also confused me. What exactly did Ham do that was so bad as to warrant his son, Canaan, being cursed? If one reads the story itself, it says nothing more than Noah drank too much wine, fell asleep naked, Ham saw his nakedness, and it was this transgression that caused Noah to curse Canaan (Ham's son).

Is there any traditional Church teaching that explains this further?

B from A · « **Reply #1 on:** December 04, 2014, 11:38:48 AM »

I don't have any great answers, but here is the Haydock commentary on it:

Quote from: Genesis 9

20 And Noe a husbandman began to till the ground, and planted a vineyard.

21 And 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.

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.

Quote from: Haydock commentary

Ver. 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. (Challoner) --- Wine, Though vines had grown from the beginning, the art of making wine seems not to have been discovered; and hence Noe's fault is much extenuated, and was at most only a venial sin. (Menochius) --- His nakedness prefigured the desolate condition of Christ upon the cross, which was a scandal to the Jєωs, and foolishness to the Gentiles. But by this folly we are made wise; we are redeemed, and enjoy the name of Christians. Sem and Japheth represent the multitude of believers, Cham and Chanaan the audacity and impudence of all unbelievers. (St. Augustine, contra Faust. xii. 24; City of God xvi. 2; St. Cyprian, ep. 63.[62.?] ad Cæcil.) (Worthington) --- Like the Manichees, modern heretics are very free in condemning many innocent actions of the Patriarchs. (Haydock)

Ver. 23. Neither ought we to be so quick-sighted in discovering the faults of any: which we often represent as real, when they are only apparent. (Haydock)

Ver. 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 fault? 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. (Challoner) --- Theodoret, q. 57. The children of Sem executed this sentence, in exterminating many of the Chanaanites under Josue. (Worthington) --- They perished for their own wickedness, which God foresaw, and revealed to Noe. Cham was severely punished by this denunciation of his children's misery. See Milton, xi. 754. xii. 27; Deuteronomy ix. 4. (Haydock)

Ver. 27. Enlarge Japheth. His name signifies latitude or enlargement. (Worthington) --- May he, God, according to some; but more probably Japheth, of whom the rest of the sentence speaks. (Haydock) --- This was verified by the extensive dominion of the children of Japheth, both in the islands and on the continent; more particularly, when the Romans subdued the Jєωs, and posterity of Sem. (Menochius) --- Referring all this to the Church, the Gentiles entered in, upon the refusal of the Jєωs, though preachers of that nation were the instruments of their conversion. Chanaan, in the mean time, cherished his slavery, and seeks not to obtain the liberty and glory of the sons of God, in which he is a figure of heretics, (Haydock) who serve to make Christians more upon their guard, and by persecuting them, exercise their patience and increase their crown. (Worthington)

Sounds like it was more of a prophecy than a curse for the action. (?)

Capt McQuigg · « **Reply #2 on:** December 04, 2014, 03:22:30 PM »

Noah, being a man of the soil, was such a drunkard that the first thing he did after the flood was to plant a vineyard so he could get drunk. He drunk himself stupid and would lay around naked. (Side question: Why do the Jєωs want us to renounce Our Lord and pledge allegiance to Noah? After all, that's what a "b'nei Noach" is.)

Hamm, unlike the other two sons, was so bold and obnoxious and so utterly lacking in modesty that he looked upon his father's nakedness while the other two boys looked in the opposite direction as they covered him.

JoeZ · « **Reply #3 on:** December 04, 2014, 06:49:25 PM »

Fermenting yeast is airborne and may well not have been pre-flood. The earth was different then. The scripture tells us the pre-flood earth was watered with the dew and also that the rainbow came about after the flood and that the flood was caused by great fountains that broke up.

In any case, Noah didn't know the effect of what he was making and sinned not, having only ever drank water pre-flood. This is the opinion of St. Cyprian(Epist. 63. ad Coecilium), St Augustine (li 16. de civit. c. 2. & li. 12. contra Faustum Manicheum. c. 23. &24). My source is the Douay Old Testement from LuLu.

God bless,
JoeZ

Nadir · « **Reply #4 on:** December 04, 2014, 07:45:57 PM »

Quote

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.

This sounds that Cham was having fun at his father's expense, but Sem and Japheth, refused even to see Noe's nakedness, a mark of their respect and love for him.

Deuteronomy 5:16
Honour thy father and mother, as the Lord thy God hath commanded thee, that thou mayst live a long time, and it may be well with thee in the land, which the Lord thy God will give thee.

InfiniteFaith · « **Reply #5 on:** December 04, 2014, 08:52:28 PM »

My thoughts on this is that Noah cursed canaan as a result of Ham's actions. Canaan and his descendants were then cursed, but they did not become slaves until the canaanites settled in the wrong territory. God eventually designated nations to the descendants of Noah's 3 sons (Japeth, Shem, and Ham). Everyone settled in the lands that were designated to them except the canaanites. The canaanites chose to settle in territory that was designated to another group even though they knew they were not supposed to. The fact that they made this choice was a sign of the curse. Like others were saying above, the curse was somewhat prophetic. I still think canaan and his descendants were always cursed, but it really showed when the canaanites settled in the wrong territory. The slavery was a consequence of this bad choice. So I guess you could say that the slavery part of the curse was prophetic. But they were cursed ever since Noah.

I do believe this curse still exists today. At the same time, I think that the curse can be broken by Baptism. Scripture does say that Christ came so that all of mankind can be saved.

However, a Baptism alone is not enough for salvation. People still have to truly believe. I wonder if a Baptism is valid if the person does not truly believe. Especially in the case of someone who gets Baptized later in life.

LaramieHirsch · « **Reply #6 on:** December 04, 2014, 11:58:00 PM »

I've read that there is a continent-sized ocean of water beneath North America and Asia in the layer of the Earth's mantle.

I'll bet it's really briny and salty.

- - - -

As far as Ham is concerned, some non-canonical sources speculate that he brought black magic with him from the antediluvian world.

Here is a link to my previous post on the matter, and what I said:

http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php?a=topic&t=34311&min=0&num=3

**************

Ham smuggled magic past the Flood, according to St. John Cassian...

From Chapter 21 of St. John Cassian's SECOND CONFERENCE OF ABBOT SERENUS. ON PRINCIPALITIES.

"And so, as ancient traditions tell us, Ham the son of Noah, who had been taught these superstitions and wicked and profane arts, as he knew that he could not possibly bring any handbook on these subjects into the ark, into which he was to enter with his good father and holy brothers, inscribed these nefarious arts and profane devices on plates of various metals which could not be destroyed by the flood of waters, and on hard rocks, and when the flood was over he hunted for them with the same inquisitiveness with which he had concealed them, and so transmitted to his descendants a seed-bed of profanity and perpetual sin. In this way then that common notion, according to which men believe that angels delivered to men enchantments and diverse arts, is in truth fulfilled. From these sons of Seth then and daughters of Cain, as we have said, there were born still worse children who became mighty hunters, violent and most fierce men who were termed giants by reason of the size of their bodies and their cruelty and wickedness. For these first began to harass their neighbours and to practise pillaging among men, getting their living rather by rapine than by being contented with the sweat and labour of toil, and their wickedness increased to such a pitch that the world could only be purified by the flood and deluge."

LaramieHirsch · « **Reply #7 on:** December 05, 2014, 12:00:08 AM »

Quote from: InfiniteFaith

My thoughts on this is that Noah cursed canaan as a result of Ham's actions. Canaan and his descendants were then cursed, but they did not become slaves until the canaanites settled in the wrong territory.

I do not think that Canaanites are today's black people. Canaanites are merely one subset of Ham's descendants. Also...weren't the Canaanites giants that the Jєωs wiped out? Anak, King Og, and the Rephaim?

InfiniteFaith · « **Reply #8 on:** December 05, 2014, 07:09:09 AM »

Quote from: LaramieHirsch

Quote from: InfiniteFaith
My thoughts on this is that Noah cursed canaan as a result of Ham's actions. Canaan and his descendants were then cursed, but they did not become slaves until the canaanites settled in the wrong territory.

I do not think that Canaanites are today's black people. Canaanites are merely one subset of Ham's descendants. Also...weren't the Canaanites giants that the Jєωs wiped out? Anak, King Og, and the Rephaim?

I don't think all of the Canaanites were killed...

Joshua 16:10-"They did not dislodge the Canaanites living in Gezer; to this day the Canaanites live among the people of Ephraim but are required to do forced labor."

Think of it this way...some group of people must be descended of the canaanites. By the looks of the things, it must be african people. Their countries are ridden with disease, poverty, wars, famines, etc. Not a single one of their countries has been able to thrive without the help of other people. There are maybe 2 or 3 african countries that might be a second world country.

There is a source that I got from the website. It was a book written by a priest about 100 years ago. He mentioned that black people should never be on the same level as white people. Nor should they be above them. The reason being was that they are canaanites, and that they have a tendency to want to do harm to white people. I will dig the source up if you want.

LaramieHirsch · « **Reply #9 on:** December 05, 2014, 01:42:49 PM »

Quote from: InfiniteFaith

There is a source that I got from the website. It was a book written by a priest about 100 years ago. He mentioned that black people should never be on the same level as white people. Nor should they be above them. The reason being was that they are canaanites, and that they have a tendency to want to do harm to white people. I will dig the source up if you want.

Please do! Sounds like fun.

InfiniteFaith · « **Reply #10 on:** December 05, 2014, 03:44:25 PM »

Quote from: LaramieHirsch

Quote from: InfiniteFaith

There is a source that I got from the website. It was a book written by a priest about 100 years ago. He mentioned that black people should never be on the same level as white people. Nor should they be above them. The reason being was that they are canaanites, and that they have a tendency to want to do harm to white people. I will dig the source up if you want.

Please do! Sounds like fun.

https://archive.org/details/howchristsaidfir00meag

Its on pp.95-96

InfiniteFaith · « **Reply #11 on:** December 05, 2014, 06:48:54 PM »

Quote from: InfiniteFaith

Quote from: LaramieHirsch
Quote from: InfiniteFaith

There is a source that I got from the website. It was a book written by a priest about 100 years ago. He mentioned that black people should never be on the same level as white people. Nor should they be above them. The reason being was that they are canaanites, and that they have a tendency to want to do harm to white people. I will dig the source up if you want.

Please do! Sounds like fun.

https://archive.org/details/howchristsaidfir00meag

Its on pp.95-96

Then of course there's Blessed Katarina Emmerick who deemed the black race as being idolatrous and stupid. The canaanites were known to be idolatrous.

OldMerry · « **Reply #12 on:** December 06, 2014, 06:06:29 PM »

Many years ago a nun told me that Cham was the father of the black race - he and his were to be the servant of their brethren due to the disrespect shown to Noe - and explains the history of slavery as pertains to the black race.

Just as an aside, I also read where Native Americans - "American Indians" - despised the blacks, saying they would never have suffered to be enslaved as the blacks allowed themselves to be. Some Indians were known to have black slaves themselves - and of course blacks were known to have black slaves. Even some cινιℓ ωαr Yankees - northern generals and soldiers - had black slaves. (Just thought I'd throw that one in there...).

LaramieHirsch · « **Reply #13 on:** December 06, 2014, 07:51:16 PM »

Quote from: Merry

Many years ago a nun told me that Cham was the father of the black race - he and his were to be the servant of their brethren due to the disrespect shown to Noe - and explains the history of slavery as pertains to the black race.

Just as an aside, I also read where Native Americans - "American Indians" - despised the blacks, saying they would never have suffered to be enslaved as the blacks allowed themselves to be. Some Indians were known to have black slaves themselves - and of course blacks were known to have black slaves. Even some cινιℓ ωαr Yankees - northern generals and soldiers - had black slaves. (Just thought I'd throw that one in there...).

Quite possible. It seems to be the reality. This idea appears to be reflected in all of African history.

All will be known in the end at the Judgement.