Servus servorum Dei

[Mike_tn]

The title of the thread is a title for the pope, which translates to Servant of the Servants of God. I’d like to juxtapose that usage with how it is used in Genesis 9 where, in brief, Noah unintentionally becomes drunk and one of his sons, Ham, makes sport of his father but his other sons Shem and Japheth do not. So Ham’s bloodline is cursed forever.

But the curse is approximately the pope’s title;

He said: Cursed be Canaan, a* servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren*.

Genesis 9:25 Douay-Rheims Catholic Bible

Catholic commentary says:

The fault is Ham’s, who shames his father by looking on his nakedness, and then tells the other sons. Ham’s conduct is meant to prefigure the later shameful sexual practices of the Canaanites, which are alleged in numerous biblical passages. The point of the story is revealed in Noah’s curse of Ham’s son Canaan and his blessing of Shem and Japheth.

Genesis 9:25 New American Bible

The two uses seem to be at odds. The pope uses it, thus the idiom is for all Catholics to live by. But I doubt the heros, Shem and Japheth of Genesis 9, think that way.
Can anyone reconcile the two uses?

 

[JRKH]

I don’t really see any problem here.

We are all servants of God and the Pope is the Servant of the Servants…“He who shall be first must be the servant of all”, so says our Lord and that is good enough for me.

Just because “servant of servant” happens to be used in a different context in another part of the Bible does not mean that they are connected…

Peace
James

 

[Mike_tn]

I find it had to believe that the two usages are totally unrelated. In Genesis 9 it is put on Ham’s son just like a title and it’s the same words. It’s his destiny. I thought the resolution was to found in contrasting the Old Covenant means of salvation which was carnal, fleshy, law based, family blood-line oriented versus the New Testament view which is spiritual in Christ and passed worldwide without error through his holy Spirit inspired bride the Catholic Church.

Today we admit our remaining concupiscence after baptism so it’s essential to live like Christ, humble, not seeking to “make a name for ourselves” like the Jews were bent on doing all the time. Being chastised as Canaan was, to be a “servant”, could be seen as dose of tough medicine which is really a blessing through the eyes of a Christian. Saints always are self-critical, Paul the “very least of all the holy ones” he says. Otherwise they can’t maintain their innocence and would fall. So there we have it. The Jews of Shems line did fall. They wore their blood line like a prideful necklace and the Jews fell often…just a little later then Canaan. I would guess individual Canaanites also converted to the Jewish faith, just not their whole nation.

I just wasn’t sure if what I just laid out above was a good idea. No one ever compared the two ideas that I heard of or read before and the similarity of the two usages is so frank.

 

[GelasianumVetus]

A phrase which goes ‘x of x’ is the semitic way of expressing a superlative (best, highest, most, least). The use of this came over to Latin through the Old Testament.

For other instances we have ‘king of kings’ ‘lord of lords’, etc.

In the Noah story it is using it as a bad sort of superlative- the ‘lowest’ of servants.

In the Pope’s title, it purposely plays on the ambiguity in the phrase- the highest of the servants/the servant of all

 

[Mike_tn]

In the Pope’s title, it purposely plays on the ambiguity in the phrase- the highest of the servants/the servant of all

Honestly in all my years I never took this one of the Pope’s titles in that manner. It didn’t even come to mind, ever. Two of you say I am wrong so perhaps I am. Something I hadn’t seen before. Thank you for this alternate light on the title.

 

[Dave_Noonan]

The title of the thread is a title for the pope, which translates to Servant of the Servants of God. I’d like to juxtapose that usage with how it is used in Genesis 9 where, in brief, Noah unintentionally becomes drunk and one of his sons, Ham, makes sport of his father but his other sons Shem and Japheth do not. So Ham’s bloodline is cursed forever.

But the curse is approximately the pope’s title;

Genesis 9:25 Douay-Rheims Catholic Bible

Catholic commentary says:

Genesis 9:25 New American Bible

The two uses seem to be at odds. The pope uses it, thus the idiom is for all Catholics to live by. But I doubt the heros, Shem and Japheth of Genesis 9, think that way.
Can anyone reconcile the two uses?

Wow, pretty interesting! As far as I know, this is the only place in the Vulgate (Gn 9:25) were the expression servus servorum occurs. It would be hard for me to believe that whoever came up with this title would be totally ignorant of its place in Scripture.