Tatoos

  • Thread starter Thread starter BrooklynBoy200
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Our body is a temple for the Holy Spirit. To tag it with vain and useless images for the sake of making a “fashion statement” is, in my opinion, a grave sin against God.

However a religious tattoo is a reminder of our faith to ourselves, and most importantly to others, and can act as valuable tool for evangelisation.
 
Well, boys and girls, ladies and gentlemen, I wade into the fray once again…I will simply tell you what I heard from the Sisters and Brothers who taught me in the 50’s and 60’s. The body is the Temple of the Holy Spirit. One does not put grafitti on the Temple. That’s my first argument.

My second argument has to do with seeing what a tatoo looks like on someone in their 70s or 80s. That hula dancer on the forearm which may have looked quite spiffy back during the 40s during WWII at some Pearl Harbor tatoo shop is not exactly edifying today.

My third and strongest argument…Tell me how you feel about tatoos when you see numbers tatooed on the left forearm of people. I’ve seen it far too many times, far too many times when I worked a cash register on Canal St. in New Orleans when I was a teenager. Ask our Jewish bretheren how they felt about those numbers…and they survived.
 
Well, boys and girls, ladies and gentlemen, I wade into the fray once again…I will simply tell you what I heard from the Sisters and Brothers who taught me in the 50’s and 60’s. The body is the Temple of the Holy Spirit. One does not put grafitti on the Temple. That’s my first argument.
What you view as grafitti many of us do not
My second argument has to do with seeing what a tatoo looks like on someone in their 70s or 80s. That hula dancer on the forearm which may have looked quite spiffy back during the 40s during WWII at some Pearl Harbor tatoo shop is not exactly edifying today.
I too have seen tat’s on seniors…but they where not your typical american slobs (overwieght etc.) so the tat’s look as good on them at 70 or 80 as it did when they got them:)
My third and strongest argument…Tell me how you feel about tatoos when you see numbers tatooed on the left forearm of people. I’ve seen it far too many times, far too many times when I worked a cash register on Canal St. in New Orleans when I was a teenager. Ask our Jewish bretheren how they felt about those numbers…and they survived.
Whats your point…my tat’s are not their to honor or symbolize the holocaust…hence I do not tattoo numbers on my arms.
And to equate a modern tattoo to the holocuast tattoos is SICK!
 
My husband wants to get a tattoo - so this thread is interesting to me. I have also considered getting one as well, but I will give much more thought to it before I commit.

As a third degree Knight of Columbus (soon to be 4th degree) - he wanted to get the KofC insignia tattooed on his shoulder. Just a reminder of his faith and the organization he is so proud to be a part of. I think that is an okay reason to want one and not a bad image that would be offensive.
 
I am also a 3rd degree Knight and I’m thinking about a related tattoo. If your hubby gets one, I’d LOVE to see it. 🙂

michel
 
What you view as grafitti many of us do not

I too have seen tat’s on seniors…but they where not your typical american slobs (overwieght etc.) so the tat’s look as good on them at 70 or 80 as it did when they got them:)

Whats your point…my tat’s are not their to honor or symbolize the holocaust…hence I do not tattoo numbers on my arms.
And to equate a modern tattoo to the holocuast tattoos is SICK!
I was relaying what I was taught back in the 50’s and 60’s. To be blunt, both Brothers and Sisters used the word “desecrate”. I was merely trying to remain charitable in my use of the word “grafitti”. Like everything else in HMC today, there are no moral absolutes - everything is relative and subject to the interpretation of the individual.

I have to question your observation of the number of people in their 70s and 80s who have tatoos. If you will accept that what I was taught as a child was the norm for America back in the 50’s and 60’s (which it most assuredly was), then the norm for persons getting tatoos back then was limited to military personnel (usually on leave and drunk) and bikers. Tatoo parlors were most assuredly not mainstream, nor were they on every corner. Indeed, back then, they were in the seedier parts of town. Few and far between are the number of people with tatoos in their 70s and 80s - unless, of course, one is a Maori. It simply wasn’t done back then. My sister, mother, aunts, and grandmothers would have died before getting a tatoo. I suspect if you check with your own relatives, you will find that this is true.

Every single tatoo I have seen on someone in their 70s or 80s is badly faded and since it is generally on their arm, I simply don’t see what obesity has to do with it. Like I said, that hula girl gotten on a sailor’s forearm in 1942 in Pearl Harbor may have looked spiffy then but by 2002, it was nothing but sad.

My comment about the holocaust taboos is not sick if one stops and thinks about it. The holocaust survivors were tatooed involuntarily and under great duress. I’ve seen both male and female survivors. They went where they were taken. You choose to do what you do. Tatoos are a very recent fad - unless, of course, you are Maori in which case I offer my most humble apologies.

I choose not to be a lemming or a slave to whatever fad Hollywood decides that we all should follow. I didn’t smoke pot back in the 70s; nor did I ever have long hair; nor did I protest the war; nor did I go to rock concerts, etc. Likewise, I choose not to desecrate the temple of the Holy Spirit. I simply cannot believe that what I was taught as a child is now OK because people have decided to follow Hollywood.

Thank God nose plugs and rings, eyebrow rings, etc. never really took off. The poet, Robert Burns, said, “Oh the gift to gie us; to see us as others see us!”
 
I have a tattoo on my right thigh. I specifically had it put in a place where I knew I would be able to cover it up easily, since I want to be a lawyer, and I don’t want a visible tattoo to be a barrier for me getting a job in the future. I got a tattoo of three flowers and a butterfly. The two stems represent my parents, the flowers my two siblings and myself, and the butterfly the child that my mom had who died. I got it so I would have a physical reminder of my family. It isn’t something I thought about lightly though, and if someone were getting on just for a fashion statement, I wouldn’t recommend it, because it is permanent.
 
My comment about the holocaust taboos is not sick if one stops and thinks about it. The holocaust survivors were tatooed involuntarily and under great duress. I’ve seen both male and female survivors. They went where they were taken. You choose to do what you do. Tatoos are a very recent fad - unless, of course, you are Maori in which case I offer my most humble apologies.
First off, there is a big difference between being forced to receive a tattoo to mark you as cattle, and receiving one willingly to commemorate something important and beautiful in your life.

Secondly, getting tattoos is not merely a “recent fad”. It would be safer to say that objecting to them is a recent fad. In fact, in the days of pilgrimages to the Holy Land, Coptic tattoos were often sought because they were only practiced by Coptic priests, and served as a clear and unmistakable sign that you had made the pilgrimage to Jerusalem.

An article on this pious practice, from the website of an Armenian church. It even features a “little old lady” getting one 👍

The days when tattoos were merely drunken trophies of scantily clad women are over. While juvenile reasons for getting tattoos persist, and always will, there is a growing appreciation of their significance as important symbols of our beliefs and memories. I know I’ve never been to a tattoo parlor in which the meaning and importance of the image wasn’t discussed before being applied, often with the counsel that this is going to be a part of you forever, so the symbol must represent something that will be a part of you forever.

Peace and God bless!
 
Sorry, I am an anthropologist by training and for Americans, it is a recent fad. I am of Celtic ancestry and am fully aware of my ancestor’s practices - likewise that of the Polynesians and other ethnic practicioners.

Answer me one question: were the Brothers and Sisters who taught me as a child that one does not desecrate the temple of the Holy Spirit wrong?
 
Answer me one question: were the Brothers and Sisters who taught me as a child that one does not desecrate the temple of the Holy Spirit wrong?
They were not wrong that one should not desecrate the Temple of the Holy Spirit, and much of what passed for “tattoo art” in their day likely was a form of desecration. If they taught that any marking of the body, regardless of the meaning and importance, is desecration then I would say that yes they were wrong, at least in an absolute sense. They are certainly welcome to their opinions, but their view does not represent the definative Catholic stance, as the Armenians and Copts can attest 😉

Peace and God bless!
 
If one were to go on pilgrimage as the Armenians and Copts do, then a tatoo would make sense within their ethnic sensibilities. But we are not Armenians, Copts, ancient Celts, Maori or any other ethnic group for which tatooing makes anthropological sense. I fail to see how a tatoo across the lower back of a young American woman (and I am being very polite here)…I see this far too often in the grocery store in the check-out line and I am repulsed…has anything other to do with anything other than following a fad. How then can those Brothers and Sisters have been wrong? What possible positive and Catholic statement can a young woman make by getting her derriere tatooed? I await a plausible answer.
 
If one were to go on pilgrimage as the Armenians and Copts do, then a tatoo would make sense within their ethnic sensibilities. But we are not Armenians, Copts, ancient Celts, Maori or any other ethnic group for which tatooing makes anthropological sense. I fail to see how a tatoo across the lower back of a young American woman (and I am being very polite here)…I see this far too often in the grocery store in the check-out line and I am repulsed…has anything other to do with anything other than following a fad. How then can those Brothers and Sisters have been wrong? What possible positive and Catholic statement can a young woman make by getting her derriere tatooed? I await a plausible answer.
Actually, I am Armenian and American. I was born and raised here, and most of my blood is non-Armenian, but my Armenian identity remains. That is part of what makes me an American.

In a culture like ours that is shaped by all sorts of various cultures that enter into it, there are going to be changes and developments, and this will be even stronger in the modern day when information spreads so quickly and freely.

The Brothers and Sisters can have been wrong as all people can be wrong. Their view was limited and their understanding incomplete. When they told you such things, did they preface it with “unless you’re Armenian or Coptic, of course”? I would wager that they didn’t, because such things were not on their radar. Likewise, they likely couldn’t comprehend the meaningful ways in which tattoos can be employed, as such a practice was not common in our culture in their time. Their statements therefore have to be understood in context, both of their time and their human limitations. A classic example of this is that many good Sisters of that day also instructed children to not chew the Eucharist, despite the fact that Jesus explicitely commanded us to chew, or “gnaw” his flesh. It was an innocent mistake, but a mistake none the less.

You are also making a false equivalency between someone getting a merely decorative tattoo on their hind-end, and someone getting a meaningful commemorative or symbolic tattoo. No one here has ever attempted to defend the former, and most of us who have defended the practice of tattooing have specifically spoken against that manner of use, so no defense is going to be forthcoming from anyone here. To say that we can’t agree with one if we don’t defend the other is a pure fallacy, as the two approaches to tattoos are fundamentally different and at odds; to hold to one is to not hold to the other.

Peace and God bless!
 
Tats are cool. Usually. I suppose that there are exceptions, but no one is ever going to get a cut and dry answer out of anyone, especially all of us on these forums. Its your own call.

This may come as a shock to you…but…

Here at the seminary quite a few of us have got tattoos. Just earlier this week me and a couple of buddies were talking about what tattoos we want to get next and helped each of us plan them out. I dont know if it matters or not, but they are all faith-based.

So if you want them, get them. As long as it is within reason and you keep in mind the potential consequences.

Everything in moderation!
 
Sorry, I am an anthropologist by training and for Americans, it is a recent fad. I am of Celtic ancestry and am fully aware of my ancestor’s practices - likewise that of the Polynesians and other ethnic practicioners.

Answer me one question: were the Brothers and Sisters who taught me as a child that one does not desecrate the temple of the Holy Spirit wrong?
they where thinking like Jews (sorry)…who still to this day follow Leviticus and will not tattoo their bodies(willingly on their own) …
 
No, no, no, my friend…your’s truly is an anthropologist…I am more than aware of how ethnic societies work. I am Acadian French, Breton French, German, Irish, Scot and English. I’m sure my ancient Celtic ancestors had tatoos. But I grew up in New Orleans with Italians, Croats, Cubans, Mexicans, African-Americans, Sicilians, Hungarians ad infinitum. The fact that we did not have Armenians or Copts here probably means that the weather was not conducive for them. Our Germans are Bavarian Catholics…we certainly don’t have many Danes, Norwegians, etc.

I repeat, what possible Catholic or Christian message can be promoted by the tatoos I’ve seen on the derrieres of far too many young ladies?

Faith based tatoos? Mon Dieu! Whatever happened to the body as the temple of the Holy Spirit?

Thusfar, I have not seen a convincing argument which would contradict what I was taught. As apologists for tatooing, y’all are not stepping up to the plate IMHO.
 
they where thinking like Jews (sorry)…who still to this day follow Leviticus and will not tattoo their bodies(willingly on their own) …
And so, when were we released from this teaching prior to and during Vatican II. I mean I have to think that the Brothers and Sisters who taught me through 13 years of Catholic education knew what they were doing. The body is the temple of the Holy Spirit…what’s so radical about that?
 
And so, when were we released from this teaching prior to and during Vatican II. I mean I have to think that the Brothers and Sisters who taught me through 13 years of Catholic education knew what they were doing. The body is the temple of the Holy Spirit…what’s so radical about that?
nothing radical but leviticus frommy understanding was dealing with idol worship…my tat’s are not worshipping any idols…also what you consider desecration is not my idea of desecration.
IF you think tat’s are desecration than ear piercing falls in that category also:mad:
 
The body is the temple of the Holy Spirit…what’s so radical about that?
Quite so. And since this particular temple is mine to look after, that I should choose to decorate it with adornments of my taste is between me the tenant and the landlord. Tattoos? Check. Leathers and bike? Check. Might even go for a piercing, now that it’s been mentioned?

Besides, how far do you want to take it? You’ll find yourself disagreeing with everything from clothing styles you find inappropriate to hats that you don’t like to be providing the roof for said temple.Then you could start on what people eat…

How someone looks and dresses or adorns themselves is of no business to anyone, let alone a follower of Christ. If someone is dressing to shock, then they are perhaps being uncharitable, but also an oppertunity to exercise some charity yourself.
 
Now, think of the irony of having Psalm 111:10 in hebrew on your wrist. :rolleyes:
 
Now, think of the irony of having Psalm 111:10 in hebrew on your wrist. :rolleyes:
*Psalm 111:10 The wicked shall see, and shall be angry, he shall gnash with his teeth and pine away: the desire of the wicked shall perish. *

Why would you tattoo that on your wrist?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top