The curse of Cain and the mark of Cain are phrases that originated in the story of Adam and Eve in the Jewish and Christian Bibles. In the stories, if someone did something to harm Cain, the damage would come back sevenfold. Some interpretations view this as a physical mark, whereas other interpretations see the "mark" as a sign, and not as a physical marking on Cain himself. The King James Version of the Bible reads "set a mark upon Cain".
Video Curse and mark of Cain
Origins
There is no clear consensus as to what Cain's mark was. The word translated as "mark" in Genesis 4:15 is 'owth, which could mean a sign, an omen, a warning, or a remembrance. In the Torah, the same word is used to describe the stars as signs or omens (Genesis 1:14), the rainbow as the sign of God's promise to never again destroy his creation as he did in the flood (Genesis 9:12), circumcision as a token of God's covenant with Abraham (Genesis 17:11), and the miracles performed by Moses before the Pharaoh (Exodus 4:8,9,17,28; 7:3; 8:23; 10:1,2).
Maps Curse and mark of Cain
Curse of Cain
The narrative of the curse of Cain is found in the text of Genesis 4:11-16. The curse was the result of Cain murdering his brother Abel and lying about the murder to God. When Cain spilled his brother's blood, the earth became cursed as soon as the blood hit the ground. In a sense, the earth was left "drinking Abel's blood". Genesis 4:12 gives a two part sentencing for Cain's curse. The first concerns the earth that was cursed by Abel's blood. Should Cain attempt to farm the land, the earth would not yield produce for him. This may imply why he went on to build cities, namely the City of Enoch. The second part of the curse marks Cain as a fugitive (Hebrew: ??? ) and a wanderer (Hebrew: ??? ). The combination of these Hebrew words ?? ????, "fugitive" and "wanderer", is unique in the Hebrew Bible. Modern interpretations of the Hebrew verse 12 suggest that Cain went on to live a nomadic lifestyle and that he was also excluded from the family unit. In the Septuagint, the emphasis on Cain's curse is dramatically increased by the combination of the Greek participles ?????? ??? ?????? ("groaning and shaking upon the earth"). Syriac Christianity interprets the Greek version to mean that Cain experienced a real physical affliction that would enable others to know who he was when they saw him. Philo interprets the Greek verse 12 as an allegory for Cain's fear of being soulless. The Samaritan Pentateuch and the Targums translate the same verse to mean that Cain feared being "an exile and an unstable man".
Mark of Cain
The Hebrew word for mark ('Oth, ????) could mean a sign, an omen, a warning, or a remembrance. The mark of Cain is God's promise to offer Cain divine protection from premature death with the stated purpose of preventing anyone from killing him. It is not known what the mark was, but it is assumed that the mark was visible. Some have speculated that the mark was a Hebrew letter placed on either the face or the arm. The Septuagint translates the mark as a "sign". Thus, it is speculated that the mark served as a sign to others not to commit the same offense.
There is also uncertainty as to why Cain should have feared being killed, since the Book of Genesis does not indicate that there were any human beings then alive other than his parents, Adam and Eve.
Judaism
Abba Arika ("Rab") said that God gave Cain a dog, making him an example to murderers. Abba Jose ben Hanan said that God made a horn grow out of Cain. R. Hanin said that God made Cain an example to penitents (Gen. Rab. 22:12).
Rashi comments on Genesis 4:15 by saying that the mark was one of the Hebrew letters of the Tetragrammaton: "He engraved a letter of His [God's] Name onto his [Cain's] forehead."
In Kabbalah, the Zohar states that the mark of Cain was one of the twenty-two Hebrew letters of the Torah, although the Zohar's native Aramaic does not actually tell us which of the letters it was. Some commentators, such as Rabbi Michael Berg in his English commentary on the Zohar, suggest that the mark of Cain was the letter vav.
Christianity
According to author Ruth Mellikoff, commentators' interpretations of the nature of the "mark" depended on their views regarding the status of Cain, as either being given additional time to repent, or as being further shamed.
Racism in religion
At some point after the start of the slave trade in the United States, many Protestant denominations began teaching the belief that the mark of Cain was a dark skin tone, although early descriptions of Romani as "descendants of Cain" written by Franciscan monk Symon Semeonis suggest that this belief had existed for some time. Protestant preachers wrote exegetical analyses of the curse, with the assumption that it was dark skin.
Early church exegesis
In Syriac Christianity, early exegesis on the "curse" and the "mark", associated the curse of Cain with black skin, although not in a racial sense.
In an Eastern Christian (Armenian) Adam-book (5th or 6th century), it is written: "And the Lord was wroth with Cain. . . He beat Cain's face with hail, which blackened like coal, and thus he remained with a black face". Again, this indicated that his face, not his body, had been changed, and that this change had no bearing on any racial or ethnic group.
Baptist segregation
The split between the Northern and Southern Baptist organizations arose over doctrinal issues pertaining to slavery and the education of slaves. At the time of the split, the Southern Baptist group used the curse of Cain as a justification for slavery. Some 19th- and 20th-century Baptist ministers in the Southern United States taught the belief that there were two separate heavens; one for blacks, and one for whites. Southern Baptists have either taught or practiced various forms of racial segregation well into the mid-to-late-20th century, though members of all races were accepted at worship services. In 1995, the Southern Baptist Convention officially denounced racism and apologized for its past defense of slavery.
The curse of Cain was used to support a ban on ordaining blacks to most Protestant clergies until the 1960s in both the United States and Europe. The majority of Christian churches in the world, including the Catholic Church, Eastern Orthodox churches, Anglican churches, and Oriental Orthodox churches, did not recognize these interpretations and did not participate in the religious movement to support them. Certain Catholic dioceses in the Southern United States adopted a policy of not ordaining blacks to oversee, administer the sacraments to, or accept confessions from white parishioners. This policy was not based on a "curse of Cain" teaching, but was justified by the widely held perception that slaves should not rule over their masters. However, this was not approved of by the Pope or by any papal teaching.
Curse of Ham
The Curse of Cain was often conflated with the Curse of Ham. According to the Bible, Ham discovered his father Noah drunk and naked in his tent, but instead of honoring his father by covering his nakedness, he ran and told his brothers about it. Because of this, Noah cursed Ham's son, Canaan by saying that he was to be "a servant of servants". (Genesis 9:20-27) One interpretation of this passage states that Ham married a descendant of Cain, who was black, so that the descendants of Canaan were both marked with black skin and cursed to be servants of servants. While there is no indication in the Bible of Ham's wife descending from Cain, this interpretation was used to justify slavery and it was particularly popular in America during the Atlantic slave trade.
Modern scholars now believe that the Canaanites are of Semitic origin, and therefore unrelated to black Africans.
Latter-day Saints
Mormonism began during the height of white Protestant acceptance of the curse of Cain doctrine in America, as well as the even more popular curse of Ham doctrine. Like many Americans, Mormons of the 19th century commonly assumed that black Africans had Cain's "mark" of black skin, and Ham's curse to be servants of servants. While Joseph Smith indicated his belief in the curse of Ham theory in a parenthetical reference as early as 1831, however, the reference is not to the "curse or mark of Cain" as in the Pearl of Great Price, it is attributed to an act of genocide upon "the people of Shum" and includes the statement that after this act the descendent of Cain were shunned: "And Enoch also beheld the residue of the people which were the sons of Adam; and they were a mixture of all the seed of Adam save it was the seed of Cain, for the seed of Cain were black, and had not place among them." (Moses 7:22) The Old Testament student manual, which is published by the Church and is the manual currently used to teach the Old Testament in LDS Institutes, teaches that Ham's wife was a descendant of Cain:
Therefore, although Ham himself had the right to the priesthood, Canaan, his son, did not. Ham had married Egyptus, a descendant of Cain (Abraham 1:21-24), and so his sons were denied the priesthood.
As related by Abraham O. Smoot after his death, Apostle David W. Patten said he encountered a black man in Paris, Tennessee, who said that he was Cain. The account states that Cain had earnestly sought death but was denied it, and that his mission was to destroy the souls of men. This further strengthened the connection between the mark of Cain and black skin. The recollection of Patten's story is quoted in Apostle Spencer W. Kimball's The Miracle of Forgiveness, a popular book within the LDS Church.
Priesthood ban
There is evidence that Joseph Smith did not consider the ban on black men to the priesthood to be relevant in modern times, since he himself (and other church leaders close to him) ordained black men into it, notably Elijah Abel and Walker Lewis.
After the death of Joseph Smith, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church) was the largest of several organizations claiming succession from Smith's church. Brigham Young (the second President of the Church) accepted the idea that people of African ancestry were generally under the curse of Cain, and in 1852, he stated that people of black African descent were not eligible to hold the church's priesthood. The ban on the priesthood was not used as a reason for the segregation of congregations, which was common in churches in the southern United States during this period of time, but it affected black members differently than it did in other churches because the LDS Church has a lay priesthood in which virtually all worthy male members become priesthood holders.
While Young never made clear the reasons for the priesthood ban, several of his successors defended it as being a result of the curse of Cain, though some disagreed. Sterling M. McMurrin reported that, in 1954, church president David O. McKay said: "There is not now, and there never has been a doctrine in this church that the negroes are under a divine curse. There is no doctrine in the church of any kind pertaining to the negro. We believe that we have a scriptural precedent for withholding the priesthood from the negro. It is a practice, not a doctrine, and the practice someday will be changed. And that's all there is to it."
In 1978, LDS Church president Spencer W. Kimball reported receiving a revelation from God allowing all worthy male members of the church to receive the priesthood without regard to race or color. The news was greeted with joy and relief by Mormons. Although the church had previously been criticized for its policy during the civil rights movement, the change seems to have been prompted by problems facing mixed-race converts in Brazil.
There has neither been an official or an explicit church repudiation of its policy, nor has there been an admission that it was a mistake. Many black church members think that giving an apology would be a "detriment" to church work and a catalyst for further racial misunderstanding. African-American church member Bryan E. Powell says: "There is no pleasure in old news, and this news is old." Gladys Newkirk agrees, stating: "I've never experienced any problems in this church. I don't need an apology .... We're the result of an apology." Many Black Mormons say that they are willing to look beyond the former teachings and cleave to the doctrines of the church, in part because of its powerful, detailed teachings on life after death.
The LDS Church has issued an official statement about past practices and theories regarding skin color, stating: "[t]oday, the Church disavows the theories advanced in the past that black skin is a sign of divine disfavor or curse, ... Church leaders today unequivocally condemn all racism, past and present, in any form."
Civil rights
When Utah was considering slavery, Brigham Young told the Utah Territorial Legislature that the curse of Cain required slavery. He argued that until all of the descendants of Abel have access to the priesthood, all of the descendants of Cain should remain in servitude. He argued that because they did not have the right to govern the affairs of the Church due to the priesthood ban, they also shouldn't have the right to govern the affairs of the state, including the right to vote. He warned that if they made the children of Cain equal to them, they would be cursed. He also argued that if someone married a descendant of Cain, that they would also have the same curse.
See also
- Badge of shame
- Curse of Ham
- Cain tradition
- Ashwatthama
References
Citations
Sources
- Byron, John (2011). Cain and Abel in text and tradition: Jewish and Christian interpretations of the first sibling rivalry. Leiden: Brill Publishers. p. 93. ISBN 9789004192522.
- Goldenberg, David M. (2003). "The Curse of Cain". The curse of Ham : race and slavery in early Judaism, Christianity, and Islam (2nd printing. ed.). Princeton [u.a.]: Princeton University Press. ISBN 069111465X.
Further reading
- Bringhurst, Newell (1981). Saints, Slaves, and Blacks: The changing place of Black people within Mormonism. Greenwood Press. ASIN B000WVPORG.
- Bush, Jr., Lester E.; Armand Mauss (1984). Neither White Nor Black: Mormon Scholars Confront the Race Issue in a Universal Church. Signature Books. ISBN 0-941214-22-2.
- Nottingham, Theodore J. (1998). The Curse of Cain: The Untold Story of John Wilkes Booth. Sovereign Publications. ISBN 1-58006-021-8.
- Schwartz, Regina M. (1997). The Curse of Cain: The Violent Legacy of Monotheism. University of Chicago Press. ISBN 0-226-74199-0.
- University of Michigan (1971). White Attitudes toward Black People. Institute for Social Research of the University of Michigan. ASIN B000TA1IZW.
- Wood, Peter H. (1996). Black Majority: Negroes in Colonial South Carolina from 1670 Through the Stono Rebellion. W. W. Norton. ISBN 0-393-31482-0.
External links
- Catholic Encyclopedia entry on Cain
- Encarta article that discusses race and religion in 1969
- Biblical racism
Source of the article : Wikipedia
0 Comments