Faith Focused Dating. Create your Free Profile and meet your Match! Sign Up for Free
A place to learn, mingle, and share

This room is for discussion for anyone who adheres to the Extraordinary form of the mass and any issues related to the practices of Eastern Rite Catholicism.

Saint Athanasius is counted as one of the four Great Doctors of the Church.
Learn More:Saint Athanasius

Sep 5th 2012 new
(Quote) Branden-878705 said: (Quote) Cindy-534370 said: Yes, I would guess so, like everything else, choose...
(Quote) Branden-878705 said:

Quote:
Cindy-534370 said:



Yes, I would guess so, like everything else, choose the ones you want to do or not. I have to read on, but this one in particular was given to us by God, for He said, I am the Lord, your God. He doesn't explain why, except to say what not to do, because He doesn't have to, He is our Father.




I the time that this law was written (and I'm not sure how long thereafter), tattoos and making cuts into the flesh were parts of ritualistic worship to false gods, hence, He says, "I am the Lord, your God." He was forbidding them from worshiping other gods. It was not necessarily the what but the why. Tattoos do not have the same meaning any longer. Some of the kosher food laws had similar reasons and were lifted because they were no longer relevant by the time of Christ. It is the same type of prohibition as cremation. Cremation was not, to the best of my knowledge forbidden in Scripture, but it was forbidden for a time by the Church. The reason was that people were doing it as a protest against the belief in the resurrection of the body. Now that this is no longer an issue, the Church no longer has a problem with cremation. Likewise, married priests. This has not always been the rule and could possibly change in the future, but for now, it serves a relevant purpose. I'm sure there are more, but these are what I can think of off the top of my head.

--hide--
You are correct Brandon, I have read this and am pointing out the Scripture passages. I do not do my own interpretations of Scripture, but I do allow myself to ponder over the Word of God. To dwell on the Word, is very fruitful, to act on the Word is even more fruitful. When I want a definite meaning to the scripture I always go to the Catholic resources and commentaries, or I will get answers from a qualified person in the church. So, allow me to ponder on this a little further. Yes, the Old covenant is over, God spoke to the people of the times, but as I look at our present time, I see tattoos with gross images, many are evil, santanic,blasphemy, their are still false gods,it is written on their bodies. I recall in elementary school the Nuns taught us not to ever tattoo our bodies, or write with ink in the skin, also not to pierce the skin and the ears. I will ponder on this more, I know there is much more.
Sep 5th 2012 new

(Quote) Cindy-534370 said: You are correct Brandon, I have read this and am pointing out the Scripture passages. I do not do my own...
(Quote) Cindy-534370 said: You are correct Brandon, I have read this and am pointing out the Scripture passages. I do not do my own interpretations of Scripture, but I do allow myself to ponder over the Word of God. To dwell on the Word, is very fruitful, to act on the Word is even more fruitful. When I want a definite meaning to the scripture I always go to the Catholic resources and commentaries, or I will get answers from a qualified person in the church. So, allow me to ponder on this a little further. Yes, the Old covenant is over, God spoke to the people of the times, but as I look at our present time, I see tattoos with gross images, many are evil, santanic,blasphemy, their are still false gods,it is written on their bodies. I recall in elementary school the Nuns taught us not to ever tattoo our bodies, or write with ink in the skin, also not to pierce the skin and the ears. I will ponder on this more, I know there is much more.
--hide--
Cindy, it should go without saying that tattoos should NOT have gross images, portray evil, or carry signs of satanic, blasphemic, false god messages. I think there is total agreement about this among the people posting. Many tats carry a cheery message -- flowers, religious images or words, and so on.

During our youth, tattoos were often "worn" by bikers, who didn't portray much of a positive image back then, rightly or wrongly. People reacted accordingly. The culture of the times was different then. Now there are bikers who are doctors, lawyers, and come from all professions and occupations. The image is completely different. The tattoo craze has gone well beyond what it used to be. Again, we see people from all walks of life sporting them. Designs that portray anti-Christian themes are limited, compared to the number of tattoos seen. I think the good nuns were speaking in terms of the culture of the times, and may have come across as overly strict. As time evolved, many practices became acceptable and aren't regarded as defiling (pierced ears, for example).

As was pointed out in last Sunday's Mass readings, it's what's inside a person that's important.

Sep 5th 2012 new

(Quote) Ray-566531 said: Cindy, it should go without saying that tattoos should NOT have gross images, portray evil, or carr...
(Quote) Ray-566531 said:

Cindy, it should go without saying that tattoos should NOT have gross images, portray evil, or carry signs of satanic, blasphemic, false god messages. I think there is total agreement about this among the people posting. Many tats carry a cheery message -- flowers, religious images or words, and so on.

During our youth, tattoos were often "worn" by bikers, who didn't portray much of a positive image back then, rightly or wrongly. People reacted accordingly. The culture of the times was different then. Now there are bikers who are doctors, lawyers, and come from all professions and occupations. The image is completely different. The tattoo craze has gone well beyond what it used to be. Again, we see people from all walks of life sporting them. Designs that portray anti-Christian themes are limited, compared to the number of tattoos seen. I think the good nuns were speaking in terms of the culture of the times, and may have come across as overly strict. As time evolved, many practices became acceptable and aren't regarded as defiling (pierced ears, for example).

As was pointed out in last Sunday's Mass readings, it's what's inside a person that's important.

--hide--


Agreed. And I'm not necessarily a fan of tattoos everywhere on the body (think that certain numbers/places are unprofessional), although I have one myself and plan on a second one on the other bicep, for me personally, I like them where they can be hidden by a sleeved undershirt if I'm wearing a thin shirt or dress shirt. . . The cup and platter can be very clean on the outside but filthy within.

Sep 5th 2012 new

www.gotquestions.org



Some articles on tattoo's, but it seems that everything has been covered in the past two forums regarding this topic.

It is a personal preference to do what you want with it.


Sep 5th 2012 new
My friend has a tatoo of Mother Mary and a huge rosary on her.....

She also collects rosaries......

I have seen lots of Our Lady of Guadalupe tatoos that were truly works of art....

And Jesus adorns the arms of many with body art......

I know others who evangelize by "talking story"

about how they got some body art when they were "lost" ....

contrasting it like a human "story board"....

speaking about what their "now that I am with Jesus" new body art means to them.....

Others memorialize lost parents, kids, or pets....

The Lord wrote our names on our souls, and that is the most important inscription....

But if someone chooses body art.....

I don't see how they could go wrong with Jesus and Mother Mary.....

I don't see it as a chip on their shoulder....I see them lifting others up with Catholic Art
Sep 5th 2012 new
I have about 5 tattoos :)

Most are religious symbols. I got a lot of lectures from my family (they mean well) lol but none of mine are visible when I'm wearing jeans and a t-shirt (that's my whole defense!! lol).

Be careful they are super addictive! lol tongue
Oct 4th 2012 new

the link below has an interesting answer to the question by a Traditional priest. . . Just to add to the mix wink


en.allexperts.com

Oct 5th 2012 new

(Quote) Elizabeth-902348 said: the link below has an interesting answer to the question by a Traditional priest. . . Just to...
(Quote) Elizabeth-902348 said:

the link below has an interesting answer to the question by a Traditional priest. . . Just to add to the mix


en.allexperts.com

--hide--

I'll start by saying that I tend to far on the far right on matters such as this (ask anyone who has been here for a while...) and I personally dislike tattoos. That being said...

There are a number of concerns with your source. First, the best we can say about the author is that he claims to be a traditional priest: only his first name is provided; there is no way to verify the claim. Since no affiliation is provided, we don't even know if he is claiming to be in communion with the Church or is a schismatic. Thus, the author is not a verifiable source of authority.

His first claim is based on Leviticus 19:28. Many will not accept this, claiming that the Old Testament law was abrogated by the New. While this is clearly not true in all cases (the decalogue (10 commandments) is in the Old Testament, as are a number of laws that are explicitly restated in the New Testament. On the other hand, there are clearly some OT laws that were abrogated, e.g., the dietary restrictions. While many discount anything in Leviticus, I have never seen a clear list of which laws were abrogated and which were not. In cases where there the act is morally uncertain we should always act in the manner that is morally safe, which in this case is to avoid tattoos; however, many do not understand this principle.

He does make a good point regarding the risk of contracting Hepatitis C or other infectious diseases from the tattoo needles. While this risk is negligible if the needles are properly sterilized, the ink is not contaminated, and the skin is properly cleaned before the procedure, we have no way to confirm all of these conditions exist. Thus, one has to morally weigh the risk of contracting a serious and incurable illness vs. the objective benfit of the tattoo. To me, this is a no-brainer, but others will disagree strongly.

Oct 5th 2012 new
(Quote) Jerry-74383 said: I'll start by saying that I tend to far on the far right on matters such as this (ask anyone...
(Quote) Jerry-74383 said:



I'll start by saying that I tend to far on the far right on matters such as this (ask anyone who has been here for a while...) and I personally dislike tattoos. That being said...



There are a number of concerns with your source. First, the best we can say about the author is that he claims to be a traditional priest: only his first name is provided; there is no way to verify the claim. Since no affiliation is provided, we don't even know if he is claiming to be in communion with the Church or is a schismatic. Thus, the author is not a verifiable source of authority.



His first claim is based on Leviticus 19:28. Many will not accept this, claiming that the Old Testament law was abrogated by the New. While this is clearly not true in all cases (the decalogue (10 commandments) is in the Old Testament, as are a number of laws that are explicitly restated in the New Testament. On the other hand, there are clearly some OT laws that were abrogated, e.g., the dietary restrictions. While many discount anything in Leviticus, I have never seen a clear list of which laws were abrogated and which were not. In cases where there the act is morally uncertain we should always act in the manner that is morally safe, which in this case is to avoid tattoos; however, many do not understand this principle.



He does make a good point regarding the risk of contracting Hepatitis C or other infectious diseases from the tattoo needles. While this risk is negligible if the needles are properly sterilized, the ink is not contaminated, and the skin is properly cleaned before the procedure, we have no way to confirm all of these conditions exist. Thus, one has to morally weigh the risk of contracting a serious and incurable illness vs. the objective benfit of the tattoo. To me, this is a no-brainer, but others will disagree strongly.



--hide--


You're on the mark, Jerry. clap
Oct 5th 2012 new

(Quote) Mary-25961 said: (Quote) David-562122 said: I don't see anything in the CCC index regard...
(Quote) Mary-25961 said:

Quote:
David-562122 said:

I don't see anything in the CCC index regarding tatooing.



Thank you, that is exactly my point. There is no interpretation in the Catholic teaching against tattoos. We may interpret Scripture as individuals but that does not mean that it is against the church's teachings..

--hide--

The Catechism is not an exhaustive collection of Catholic moral teaching. There is no valid conclusion to be drawn from the omission of a given topic.

Posts 31 - 40 of 40