Tatoos?

[Carrie]

Michael, when the Church agrees to your definition, then I'll agree with you. But as of right now, the Church does not say it's a sin and you do not know better than the Church. End of story.

God Bless

[Christina]

[quote name='Carrie' date='Aug 10 2004, 07:45 AM'] Michael, when the Church agrees to your definition, then I'll agree with you.  But as of right now, the Church does not say it's a sin and you do not know better than the Church.  End of story. 

God Bless [/quote]
I agree Carrie, well said.

I did find this passage in Leviticus 19:28...

[b]Do not lacerate your bodies for the dead, and do not tattoo yourselves. I am the LORD. [/b]

I did some research and found one comment by Father Gregory Corio of the Los Angeles Archdiocese of the Catholic Church.

[i]"The New Testament says that Christians are not bound by the old law. We still observe the Ten Commandments and we've changed the Sabbath to Sunday. With regard to the Levitical law that forbids the marking of the body is sacred and is the temple of the Holy Spirit. We may not mutilate the body." As for what is mutilation and what is simply enhancing the natural beauty of the body, Father Corio says, "I suppose a lot of it is intention of the person getting the e tattoo. It's open to interoperation and dependent on a lot of things: cultural influences and social influences> There are people who live in societies where tattooing is just part of their culture. For people who live in various tribes in Africa, for example, the acquisition of a tattoo or mark on the body is part of the rite of passage from childhood. So the church tries to be sensitive to various social places where she finds herself. As for actual mutilation of the body, that would be wrong. There is no law in the New Testament against the marking of the skin, just the mutilation of it."[/i]

Other than this... I really don't find any official teachings. So far, I see no sin in getting a simple tattoo that glorifies God. Something hidden and private.

Edited August 10, 2004 by Christina

[Noel's angel]

If ur tattoo is for glorifying God, why hide it? im still against them because i did read that passage about not tattooing, plus how many tattoos do u need to have before u have too many??????

[Carrie]

You can glorify God privately, in your own way.

[amarkich]

You have to be careful not to take your information from a biased source, i.e., someone who has a tattoo or someone who has a close friend or relative who has a tatoo (this is always a problem when seemingly ambiguous questins on morality arise). The Church has two sources by which dogma and laws of morality are derived: Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture. Sacred Tradition surely directs us that having a tattoo is sinful. Have you ever heard of or seen a portrait of a Saint with a tattoo? I don't think so. More importantly, tattoos have always been signs of Satanic involvement and occult behavior. This has changed in recent history, but that does not somehow mean that it is acceptable ("Everyone else is doing it; therefore, it is acceptable). Not only does Sacred Tradition condemn tattoos but so does Sacred Scripture. We see from the beginning of God's Covenant with the human race, in the Old Testament, that "You shall not make any cuttings in your flesh, for the dead, neither shall you make in yourselves any figures or marks: I am the Lord." (Lev. 19:28) N.B., This is the same passage from which the Church has traditionally derived its condemnation of autopsies. I have to cut this post short because I am not home now (I cannot use my home computer on this forum until August 25), but I will just say again that tattoos are condemned by both Tradition and Scripture. This is more than enough to prove that they are unacceptable. Tattoos that have otherwise holy images should be considered blasphemous, not pious. God bless.

[Carrie]

Again, the Church does not condemn tattoos. I'll go by what the Church says. Until the Church does condemn then, they are not sinful, regardless of your beliefs.

God Bless

[Christina]

[quote name='amarkich' date='Aug 10 2004, 11:18 AM'] More importantly, tattoos have always been signs of Satanic involvement and occult behavior. [/quote]
Show me where the Church forbids tatoos.... and by the way wedding rings are an ancient pagan tradition... why are we allowed to wear them?

[MichaelFilo]

You said that you are enhancing the body by placing a tattoo on it. Please tell me, how can we enhance what God has given us? Please give me some explanation, because I don't seem to understand how we can improve on what has given us.

This would be personal conviction, if it was a personal belief. The Church allows cultural practices as that of the Africans, it does not promote them. The Catholic Church is wise, and knows that the Faith won't spread if you take away everything a culture has to identify itself with. The Church only implants the Faith, and the seed grows, and in time, these practices get rooted out.

There are no saints with tattoos. Mutilation of the body is required to get a tattoo. If there was any other way to bloch the skin with a tattoo, I'd just ohld it as personal conviction that it is wrong, however this isn't the case. Tattoos require that the skin become peirced, and mutiliation of the body occur for a tattoo to be placed.

God bless,

Mikey

[Aloysius]

I have more respect for people who would rather preserve the beauty of the body God gave them. People who attempt to "enhance" it loose respect in my book. I would never get a tattoo and would advise that others should not either.

[MichaelFilo]

[quote name='Aloysius' date='Aug 10 2004, 06:25 PM'] I have more respect for people who would rather preserve the beauty of the body God gave them. People who attempt to "enhance" it loose respect in my book. I would never get a tattoo and would advise that others should not either. [/quote]
Again, I agree with you completely, but this is the personal conviction that I have, although I dare say that enhancing (or believing you can enhance) the body is somewhat blasphemous.

I will pray that you make the right decision, and that you reap your rewards of not commiting this sin against your body, when the resseruction of our bodies occurs.

Anyways,

God bless,

Mikey

[Lil Red]

mikey, how is a single piercing of the ears cultural, but not tattoos? that statement of yours doesn't make sense.

[MichaelFilo]

Just as the tattoos on the africans is part of their culture. As I said, I wish ear peircing is something I dissaprove of. I guess the only reason I said it was cultural is because I assumed it has been part of European culture and passed down. I possibly could be wrong, and if so, then ear peircings are wrong, as well.

Tattoo's only basis in the states and European countries is the culture of death's rebellion against order and the beauty of nature for disorder and the love of the man made unnatural dispositions and ways of life.

God bless,

Mikey

[Lil Red]

aha, but it's still CULTURE!

[Lil Red]

i'm not trying to bash you, i'm just saying to use a different argument, because that one (at least the way you've presented it) doesn't make sense.

[MichaelFilo]

It is still a culture, but we have to test the values of a culture. Your right however, I am wrong, ear peircing is wrong as well. I am sorry I had to comprimise my values to accept a culture (ie. I held improper beliefs, that went along the thinking of, if everyone does it, it is right). Thank you Lil Red for pointing out my error. Now that I think of it, both use a certain method to try to improve/enhance the body. I'll be more careful in not making those mistakes. Please feel free to correct me when I'm in error, I'm here to learn as well.

God bless,

Mikey

[IcePrincessKRS]

Uh....... So anything beyond basic hygiene is bad?

[MichaelFilo]

Anything beyond hygiene is vain. Please remember we can straighten our hair, as it make it orderly. We can take a bath everyday, so we don't smell offensive. We can do a number of things that will help us look presentable.

Some of the saints even rejeceted that. St. Francis when he took on the role of a beggar, had no access to bathing or a change of clothes, or a comb, or a razor, or any soap.

Topic at hand : Tattoos. Anyone want to tell me self-mutiliation (by consent) is cool to acheive an end, please do.

God bless,

Mikey

[J.R.D]

Crud i chose yes i meant no ok....... Its only a sin if u put like devil worshipin tatts on ur body i asked a nun and she saids that but imma ge a tatt when i turn 15 or 16 prolly u know mabey just somethin that represents me so.......

[MichaelFilo]

Since this isn't apotheouns field, I'm sure he won't say much on it. However, I'd like to know his view. If he is for tattoos, he's bound to make a good case. However, I still don't think you can justify consenting to self-mutiliation.

God bless,

Mikey

[MichaelFilo]

[quote name='J.R.D' date='Aug 10 2004, 08:11 PM'] Crud i chose yes i meant no ok....... Its only a sin if u put like devil worshipin tatts on ur body i asked a nun and she saids that but imma ge a tatt when i turn 15 or 16 prolly u know mabey just somethin that represents me so....... [/quote]
You indeed chose yes. There have been no recent votes for "no". Again, if you are willing to destroy a part of your body for the greater glory of a tattoo and representation of your personal beliefs through a tattoo, do so. However, I do believe we were given our bodies for the greater glory of God. Maybe I was taught incorrectly. You maybe able to point out how I am wrong, or you could possibly show me where our will overrides wrong or right.

This is not sarcastic. This is the only reasonable response I can give to your post.

God bless,

Mikey