They generally do not, in that this explosion of tattooing is a fairly recent social phenomenon, and TLM adherents generally tend to be rather “retro” in their lifestyles and sensibilities (there are exceptions). There is a certain type of traditionalist who is basically “frozen” circa 1955. This may be changing.
No.
It doesn’t matter what other people have or do. If you have tattoos you are no less welcome at any mass— TLM or ordinary form— than anyone else.
IDK why it matters what “traditionalists” or anyone else thinks about tattoos?
In America.
I cant speak for others. Myself I see them as trashy at worst, immature at best. If you see graffiti on a street corner, you may regard it as a work of art or as an act of vandalism. I see it as the latter and much more so with regard to our bodies, which I see as being profaned by such expressions. Content of the depiction notwithstanding.
On the contrary, there’s nothing wrong with your opinion, as long as you recognize that it’s just your opinion and no one else is obligated to care whether you like their tattoo or not.
Yeah, doesn’t bother me. I have a tattoo, kind of want another, but I recognize they’re not everyone’s bag and that’s fine.Never woulda guessed
I’m not disgruntled. Why would you think I am? I’m saying there’s nothing wrong with your stance because you recognize that’s it’s just your opinion.
Oh dear. I feel like I’ve just been slapped by a white glove. Positively monocle popping.
You are correct. I had more in mind the commercialized, highly elaborated, “message”-type tattoos that make great use of color, or that are almost photographic in nature. I do realize that certain cultures have various forms of traditional body art, scarification, and other body modifications (stretching the earlobes, etc.).HomeschoolDad:
In America.
Tattoos have been part of other cultures for centuries and still are.
We can reconcile over a glass of claret and a game of whist. Then give each other prison tattoos with a pen.It happens… no need to cry over it
Tattoos would fall under the Catholic teaching of not mutilating one’s body because it is a temple of the Holy Spirit.
By this reasoning, then me getting a tattoo of Jesus’ name on my arm should make me very holy and live a long life in the service of the Lord.
This would be my first instinct too, but to my knowledge, the magisterium has never taught against them, and as I said in a post some time back, I can’t go back to graduate school, earn my credentials in moral theology, and start a one-man campaign to lobby Rome to condemn them. (I’m not trying to be sarcastic, I mean that. That’s what it would take, and there is no reason whatsoever, to think it would be successful.) Tattooing and other bodily decoration and external modification is also a highly culturally-based phenomenon, and the Church is loath to go in and start trying to micro-manage things that are unique to a given culture. I don’t know what has brought on the current craze in our society to get sometimes massive amounts of ink — personally, I think modern people have gone buck-wild over them (and buck-wild over many other things as well), but opinions are like foreheads, everybody has one. I really don’t care for them, but I cannot condemn what the Church doesn’t condemn.HomeschoolDad:
Tattoos would fall under the Catholic teaching of not mutilating one’s body because it is a temple of the Holy Spirit.
Hadn’t thought of that. Point well made.