Tattoos at the Latin Mass?

  • Thread starter Thread starter ThePuzzledCatholic
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Tis_Bearself said:
If traditionalists really want to uphold tradition, then they should support Christians getting Christian tattoos.
It’s a tradition that goes back 700+ years.
Click to expand...
“Tradition” often is just shorthand for “America in the 1950s”.
 
Margaret_Ann said:
40.png
HomeschoolDad:
The Church has no teaching on tattoos.
Click to expand...
Tattoos would fall under the Catholic teaching of not mutilating one’s body because it is a temple of the Holy Spirit.

When I was on retreat some years ago, the priest told us this true story:

In NYC, a fellow went to a tattoo shop and got a tattoo of the devil on his arm. He paid his bill and literally on the threshold of the door he started acting like a possessed person and then dropped dead on the sidewalk outside the door of the tattoo shop.
Click to expand...
There’s a whole genre of such stories. In my Massachusetts parochial school the nuns told the story of 3 boys who skipped school on a Friday, drove to Boston to see a Red Sox game, had hot dogs (! - this would have been the 1950’s, or ‘40’s), got into an accident on the way home, died, and went to Hell. I don’t think such stories are exactly “ex cathedra” teachings.
 
Montrose said:
That is insulting.
Click to expand...
I don’t know. It seems pretty straightforward to say that people with tattoos are less conservative (on the subject of tattoos, not necessarily religious doctrine or politics) than those without. In the US, anyway.
 
ThomasMT said:
As the less conservative folk are eager to point out, the Church doesnt hold much of a position on the matter. . . .
Click to expand...
The fact that the church doesn’t hold a position on something is a statement of fact and has exactly nothing to do with one’s politics, ecclesiastical or otherwise. I occasionally get Bioethics consultation calls from people who want me to help them justify this position or that on which the church has no position, or which is at most left to one’s prudent judgement. I tell these people that I cannot make church teaching say what it doesn’t. I can only play the cards I’m dealt. And so can anyone else, liberal or conservative.

-Fr ACEGC
 
Pitcairn17 said:
There’s a whole genre of such stories. In my Massachusetts parochial school the nuns told the story of 3 boys who skipped school on a Friday, drove to Boston to see a Red Sox game, had hot dogs (! - this would have been the 1950’s, or ‘40’s), got into an accident on the way home, died, and went to Hell. I don’t think such stories are exactly “ex cathedra” teachings.
Click to expand...
And we know that they went to hell exactly how…?

On the other hand, if it were a true story, it could actually be very instructive — “these boys did something that is forbidden on pain of mortal sin (or so it was at the time), and they died in the midst of their adventure, do you think they were able to make an act of perfect contrition before they died?”.

This verges on something like George Carlin’s quip about going to hell for eating a beef jerky. I’m not sure that binding under pain of mortal sin was the best way to guide the faithful to perform a token act of penance one day a week.
 
RolandThompsonGunner said:
40.png
Tis_Bearself:
If traditionalists really want to uphold tradition, then they should support Christians getting Christian tattoos.
It’s a tradition that goes back 700+ years.
Click to expand...
“Tradition” often is just shorthand for “America in the 1950s”.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Yes, it’s very much a case of “going back in the checkbook and finding the last point at which the checkbook balanced and reconciled correctly”.

Such a worldview neglects things like Jim Crow, wives being pretty much non-entities as far as credit and mortgage lending was concerned (her income, if she had one, could not be used to qualify), and crushing conformity that forced everyone to try to be exactly like everyone else. And let’s not forget all of the sexual abuse that got swept under the carpet.
Click to expand...
 
HomeschoolDad said:
Such a worldview neglects things like Jim Crow, wives being pretty much non-entities as far as credit and mortgage lending was concerned (her income, if she had one, could not be used to qualify), and crushing conformity that forced everyone to try to be exactly like everyone else. And let’s not forget all of the sexual abuse that got swept under the carpet.
Click to expand...
Exactly. Every era is a mixed bag, and idealizing the past isn’t a good look.
 
A friend of mine, a Syriac Christian from Turkey, told me that his grandmother had a Cross tattooed on her forehead. Apparently it is a thing where he comes from, especially among older folks. He is not Catholic, but the Christians there are definitely traditional.
 
They are mentioned in the Mosaic laws as a no-go for the Jewish people, but I don’t think that carried over to the Catholic Church. Much like most of the dietary restrictions.

Leviticus 19:28 “You shall not make any gashes in your flesh for the dead or tattoo any marks upon you: I am the LORD.”
 
I’ve been really considering getting the reverse side of the miraculous medal on my left forearm and the pic of my avatar on my right, but I’m also questioning the maturity and rationality of getting one since I’m almost 39.
 
rivera01 said:
I’m also questioning the maturity and rationality of getting one since I’m almost 39.
Click to expand...
A lot of people over 40 get tattoos.
In many cases they’re doing it at a later age because tattoos are more socially acceptable now than when they were 20, and also sometimes they had family members such as parents who didn’t like the tattoo idea who have now passed on, so they’re free to get what they want. In some cases they are also more able to afford what they want.

Also when you are older, you’re less likely to make a rash decision about what you want, and choose things that you truly want on your body forever. In many cases the tattoos are to commemorate deceased loved ones or a religious commitment or other deep meaning. It’s not just a snap decision made on a beach vacation, “oh let’s get tattoos” and feeling peer-pressured into it.
 
I was 48 when I got my first tattoo.
I’m now 50, have 3 and getting my 4th next month.
 
In my experience, if a person who attends the Latin mass has a tattoo in a spot where it would be considered immodest to show (like shoulder or leg), it will be covered.

But if the tattoo is on the hands, lower part of arm, or neck (for example) most are not going to go out of their way to hid them (unless they are scandalous from a time before their conversion)
 
Last edited:
HomeschoolDad said:
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.
Click to expand...
I would not say that at all.

I know a ton of Latin Mass men who have tattoos from their time in the military & I know many Gen X and Millennial men & women who received tattoos before their conversion.
 
phil19034 said:
40.png
HomeschoolDad:
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.
Click to expand...
I would not say that at all.

I know a ton of Latin Mass men who have tattoos from their time in the military & I know many Gen X and Millennial men & women who received tattoos before their conversion.
Click to expand...
Well, as far as the former, I haven’t seen them, that’s all I can say. I didn’t say that nobody has them, I was referring to the explosion of personal expression via body art, that has taken place in the past 20 years or so. At least in my part of the country, it is very rare to see a person under the age of 30 with no ink whatsoever.
 
HomeschoolDad said:
Well, as far as the former, I haven’t seen them, that’s all I can say. I didn’t say that nobody has them, I was referring to the explosion of personal expression via body art, that has taken place in the past 20 years or so. At least in my part of the country, it is very rare to see a person under the age of 30 with no ink whatsoever.
Click to expand...
The former military guys I’ve seen when they were either wearing a short sleeved shirt to mass OR when they rolled up their sleeves for some event at the parish.

I know of one millennial woman with a tattoo (for example) that I never saw at mass. I only saw it on her at a Bible study at the parish, when she was wearing more relaxed clothing (yet still modest). She has a tendency to really cover up at mass.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top