Tattoos

[Traditionallyruralmom]

Not OP (sorry OP, jumping in here) but what do you guys think about a Catholic tattoo to cover up an old occult tattoo until I can afford to have it removed? Or would it just be better to wait to have the laser removal and leave as-is for now?

St Benedict Medal tattoo over it and leave it at that 

[Gardener]

Not OP (sorry OP, jumping in here) but what do you guys think about a Catholic tattoo to cover up an old occult tattoo until I can afford to have it removed? Or would it just be better to wait to have the laser removal and leave as-is for now?

Laser removal is expensive, highly painful (I thought it was worse than the tattoo process itself), and takes a lot of sessions to make a dent in it (much less actually remove it).

If you notice in a lot of successfully removed tattoos, the before pic features a cheap quality tat. They rarely say how many sessions it took to fully remove it.

Here's some articles:
https://www.glamour.com/story/tattoo-removal-cost-what-is-it-like
https://www.self.com/story/laser-tattoo-removal-myths

So you'd have to ask yourself if you could:

1) Afford it
2) Stand it
3) Be patient with it

Otherwise, do a cover up.

[Vetus Ordo]

Although I don't see anything intrinsically wrong with a tatto itself, unless the drawing is vulgar or sinful, I'd still advise against it.

The culture of tattoos (and piercings) that has blossomed in the last 40 years is highly paganized. It's intrinsically linked with a culture of rebellion and licentiousness. Christians do well to stay away from it, since most of them are pretty bad anyway and disfigure the body. I've seen guys tattoo even their necks. Or, worse, faces. It's just utterly ugly.

If you happen to have one and it's decent, fine. But it's better to avoid having one in the first place, given our social context.

[Sempronius]

Although I don't see anything intrinsically wrong with a tatto itself, unless the drawing is vulgar or sinful, I'd still advise against it.

The culture of tattoos (and piercings) that has blossomed in the last 40 years is highly paganized. It's intrinsically linked with a culture of rebellion and licentiousness. Christians do well to stay away from it, since most of them are pretty bad anyway and disfigure the body. I've seen guys tattoo even their necks. Or, worse, faces. It's just utterly ugly.

If you happen to have one and it's decent, fine. But it's better to avoid having one in the first place, given our social context.

How do you base your conclusion that tattoos aren't intrinsically evil?

If I were to say that they are, then on what grounds would I be wrong?

[Vetus Ordo]

How do you base your conclusion that tattoos aren't intrinsically evil?

A drawing on your skin as a simple adornment of the body does not go against natural law, anymore than lipstick, dying your hair or putting earrings.

Tattoos can be evil if the drawing is sinful or if they completely disfigure the body due to their extension or location. Also, there are cultural considerations to be had, as I said previously.

If I were to say that they are, then on what grounds would I be wrong?

I don't know. Are you presenting a case?

[Heinrich]

This thread has changed the minds of zero people, it appears. People who like 'em will keep arguing theirs against those who don't.

[Vetus Ordo]

This thread has changed the minds of zero people, it appears. People who like 'em will keep arguing theirs against those who don't.

You have incidentally described the whole history of internet fora.

[Gardener]

[Graham]

Tats are low class, don't get one.

[Matto]

I have a weakness for girls with tattoos. It is a real weakness. It is a self-destructive impulse, but I cannot control it. My second real girlfriend was covered with tattoos. Flowers and hummingbirds in reds and blues and greens. Before I was Christian. And then there was the girl who I loved more than any other. When I knew her she had no tattoos but after she went away she painted herself a lot. Now she is covered in tattoos. I am still drawn to her and I look at pictures of her tattoos. I write about her in my free time. I am a degenerate.

[tx2step]

..

[mikemac]

Health Canada stopped using this advertisement in 2016. 

Sergeant Dave has dog's ashes put in tattoo
19 Feb 2016
http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/35611929/army-veteran-has-dogs-ashes-put-in-tattoo

[Gardener]

One of mine...
I also have a giant rosary on the other side of my back.
And many more... regrets? Zero.

People's attitudes & opinions on tattoos annoy me.
I think you could find more important issues to twist off about.

.

I have 1.80 sleeves (not a full sleeve on the right arm; left arm covered to armpit), a calf piece, and a meat tag from my Army days.

[yt]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=30GD25un0XQ[/yt]

[Graham]

One of mine...
I also have a giant rosary on the other side of my back.
And many more... regrets? Zero.

People's attitudes & opinions on tattoos annoy me.
I think you could find more important issues to twist off about.

.

wow I take it all back tats aren't low class at all

[Chestertonian]

As said previously, I don't buy the 5th commandment claim against tattoos at this time, nor really the idea of modesty, vanity, etc. if the tattoo is in a location where it cannot be seen or where it could be, but the wearer intends to cover it.

Fr. Peter Joseph has an article in Latin Mass magazine about the morality of tattoos and piercing: http://www.latinmassmagazine.com/articles/articles_2002_SU_Joseph.html

He begins by referencing, yet using those stupid ellipses (...) in order to cut out the true meaning of the verse. I ALWAYS look up full quotes when I see ellipses, on the chance the [redacted] portion is pertinent to the argument. In the case of Leviticus 19:28, it most certainly is and represented only a minor removal for space. As such, I consider his removal of the portion "for the dead" more of a rhetorical trick than necessitated by a long portion which was not pertinent or otherwise allowed the point to be made.

Fr. Peter Joseph's article: " "You shall not make any cuttings in your flesh...or tattoo any marks upon you: I am the Lord" (Leviticus 19:28)"

Full verse: "[28] 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 DRB

Haydock:

Ver. 28.  Dead.  Adonis or Osiris; as if you were mourning for them, in which sense the former verse may be explained.  At funerals it was customary to cut off the hair.  Achilles and his soldiers did so at the death of Patroclus.  Homer. --- The Persians also cut the manes of their horses, to shew their grief for the loss of Masistius, (Herod. ix. 24,) as Alexander did when Hephæstion died.  Plutarch. ---  The Egyptians, Assyrians, &c. cut their hair on the like occasions, and the Hebrews did so too; whether they neglected this law, or it was rather designed only to hinder them from joining in a superstitious lamentation for some idol.  They also cut their bodies, Gen. l.  Jer. xli. 5.  The pagans did so, intending thereby to appease the anger of the infernal deities: ut sanguine...inferis satisfaciant, (Varro, Servius): or to please the deceased.  Plutarch, de consol.  Thus Virgil represents Anna, Æn. iv.: Unguibus ora soror fædans & pectora pugnis.  The Roman and Athenian laws restrained this cruelty of women towards themselves.  But in Persia, the children and servants of great men still make an incision upon their arms, when their father or master dies.  The women in Greece also observe a solemn mourning, with loud lamentations, tearing their cheeks and hair, and reciting the memorable actions of the deceased.  The Christians and Jews of Syria inflict still more serious wounds upon themselves.  The latter have always esteemed it lawful to adopt the customs of the nations with whom they lived, provided they were not attended with superstition; which makes us conclude, that what Moses here forbids was done in honour of some idol. --- Marks, made with a hot iron, representing false gods, as if to declare that they would serve them forever.  Philo. --- The Assyrians had generally such characters upon their bodies.  Philopator ordered the converts from the Jewish religion to be marked with ivy, in honour of Bacchus.  3 Macc.  Theodoret (q. 18) mentions, that the pagans were accustomed to cut their cheeks, and to prick themselves with needles, infusing some black matter, out of respect for the dead, and for demons.  Allusion is made to these customs, Apoc. xiii. 16, and Isai. xlix. 15.  Christians have sometimes marked their arms with the cross, or name of Jesus.  Procop. in Isai. xliv. 5.  C. --- As S. Jane Frances de Chantal did her breast.  Brev. Aug. 21.  Nomen pectori insculpsit.  S. Paul says, I bear the marks of the Lord Jesus in my body.  Gal. vi. 17.  The Church historians relate, that S. Francis and S. Catharine received miraculously the prints of his wounds.  H.

As one can see, this verse is prohibiting cutting and tattooing (which would probably include branding) in the context of pagan worship, and very specifically ancestor worship (or appeasing the "gods" for the ancestors).

Aside from bad images, or images which might give the impression of impiety, I cannot really see a direct moral problem with them. I'd even say that if one had such a design, they could be right in getting it covered up depending on its nature. I have one such design on my right bicep. I don't buy the "body is a temple" argument either, as that opens a rabbit hole from which there is no real escape. I'll buy it when the person saying it loses their 30-250lbs of flubber (and don't they dare try the "it's genetic!" argument. No, you're a lard-ass. Try again.). If they really believed that in the context of their argument, they'd be doing their best to truly take care of their bodies.

Where I see the problem is in the realm of prudence: socially and financially.

Depending on the location (regardless of the design), it could be very problematic even if the design is innocuous.

Financial: tattoos ain't cheap. Any reputable artist (and they are artists) is going to charge minimum $100/hr and/or a price depending on the piece. They have to do the same setup of their equipment whether it's a tiny one or a big one. So, one needs to ask themselves if they could use that money more wisely. In the 5 years I was under the needle, I probably dropped about 4000 dollars on ink. Maybe less. Not more for sure. Unless one has money to burn, what really is the point?

Maturation: I'm not a very big fan of my tattoos these days. Some are still great art. Some haven't aged well (mainly certain colors). One is inappropriate. I suspect that the only one Christ won't blot out on my glorified body, if I am saved, is the Chi-Rho piece on my right elbow. I cannot see Him blotting out a Christogram.

Aside from social considerations, such as the Copts, the only marks we need on our entire selves are the marks of Baptism and Confirmation, and if a priest, Ordination. These are marks on our souls, much more indelible into aeviternity than mere marks on our bodies.

Do I want more tattoos? Sometimes. I go through periods where I think "oh, that would be a good one."

Since I don't buy the blanket moral argument (please, try... if there is one to be made, do your best and I'll listen), and we were thrown headlong into a persecution where social considerations are no longer relevant, I'd probably do some overtly Catholic tattoos just to solidify and reinforce my own desire to not commit apostasy.

After all, an old English rendering of "Hail Mary" fits conveniently across the knuckles. The two sides of the St. Benedict medal would look great in black/grey shades on the back of the hands. Perhaps tattoos of the stigmata to remind oneself of our Lord's passion. Who knows.

If you're gonna get your head cut off, might as well go out in "trashy", devout style I guess.

I don't buy the "return to brutish behavior" argument, either. Humans are humans are humans. Say otherwise, and you run into the nascent arguments of Modernism. We desire to worship and show devotion, and even our own internal dialogue, hopes, fears, dreams with external manifestation, including via our bodies. The clothes you wear, the hair style you have (well, for those of you not prematurely balding), etc., are all manifestations of something you desire to show the world. This extends, in some manner, to tattoos. The question is what does the tattoo (or tattoos) say about your inner self (i.e., your soul and intellect) at the time of its being received?

Nor do I buy the "low class" argument. I guarantee there are people you know who you think are great folks, and they have tattoos you don't know about. Are they low class? No.

And one last thing: tattoo removal. Don't kid yourself if you think this is a future possibility as based on current technology. I tried to start the process and went through about 6 sessions. 1) it was painful as could be. Worse than the actual tattoo. 2) it succeeded in doing a poor job and only partially faded it. Good tattoos are HARD to remove. Some piece of crap you got at 16 in a "prison" style with low amounts of ink and bad ink at that? possible. Good, professional ink? Very, very hard with the modern laser removal methods. Surgery can do it, but it will cost you and likely leaves a scar.

I didn't  think He would get rid of scars because didn't He retain His wounds?