Tattoo's - where should a Catholic stand

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Catholic : One Thread

This may be a subject already discussed either way my eldest daughter has returned back packing in Australia, New Zealand & Fiji. She proudly displays 3 ornate tattoos’, one on the base of her spine, another neatly around her belly button and a third on her shoulder. To calm me down I’m told the shoulder written in Maori scribes to “I belong to Christ”.

I’m not happy and yet I can’t find reference in the bible. A close catholic friend who has traveled to Israel over Easter when times were more peaceful mentions that today Jews of north African and middle eastern origin use henna on their wedding days to ornate their hands & feet.

This is a long-standing tradition and it would it go back to the time of Jesus. If so how does the catholic faith deem tattoos? My husband has yet to find out and as practicing Catholics I don’t know how to discuss this with my daughter without appearing as “behind times” and “out of touch”. She is after all 22 and excited about life.

-- victoria (ocelynv1@hotmail.com), May 06, 2003

Answers

Response to Tatoo's - where should a catholic stand

Quite precisely, Leviticus 19:28, King James version states, "Do not cut your bodies for the dead or put tattoo marks on yourselves. I am the Lord." In fact, the fiery Old Testament passage could be interpreted as a strict prohibition by God himself of the practice of tattooing in general. Or is it simply a literal, anachronistic prohibition thousands of years out of date? So, where does the church stand on tattooing? If you're a God-fearing Christian, should you tattoo Jesus or a sacred heart wrapped in thorns on your skin? If you are contemplating a Rock of Ages, Christ on the cross, or even a black panther with the words, "I love you mom" on your skin, will you anger God? Well, here is the real deal about what Western religions have to say about tattoos.

-- Just ME. (dontemail@thisaddress.com), May 06, 2003.

Response to Tatoo's - where should a catholic stand

This is not a moral issue. It is not harmful to either the body or the spirit (assuming of course that proper sanitary procedure is used). It is in the same category as wearing makeup and jewelry (incuding various kinds of body piercing). Being on the parental end of things, I personally think it is dumb, and usually unattractive. But it is not "wrong" in any spiritual or moral sense.

Of course, some Christian sects would insist I am wrong about this. But then, some of them would say the same thing about makeup, jewelry, dancing, smoking, drinking, women wearing pants, etc., etc.

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), May 06, 2003.


Response to Tatoo's - where should a catholic stand

Victoria..

Go to askjeeves.com - and look for some information there.. http://www.psychoclown.com/prayn.htm

Me personally.. If your daughter is 22 years old.. It is her body.. and her life... Love her no matter what and DO NOT JUDGE her for putting art on her body..

-- Jenny (jenny@myhome.com), May 06, 2003.


Response to Tatoo's - where should a catholic stand

She sounds like a "free spirit", especially if she went off backpacking on her own. Not much to do about it now, though. Might as well put it behind you and keep loving your daughter.

Frank

-- someone (ChimingIn@twocents.cam), May 06, 2003.


Response to Tatoo's - where should a catholic stand

What it can do is hurt her chances for when she applies for certain types of jobs. Tattoos indicate impulsive/reckless behavior (since usually one is drunk or being egged on by friends, etc.), and that can translate into employers not wanting someone "impulsive" in any position requiring maturity.

Although it does matter a little as to the type of tattoo and where it is. "US Marines" will probably be looked on a little more favorably than "Motley Crue", if you get my drift. For certain types of jobs she may always be required to wear long sleeves because of the image the employer is trying to maintain.

-- GT (nospam@nospam.com), May 06, 2003.



Response to Tatoo's - where should a catholic stand

"impulsive/reckless behavior (since usually one is drunk or being egged on by friends.)"

Or the person could be choosing to commit to something and wants to display his/her commitment by having it permanantly tattooed on.

Most places (now) won't tattoo a person if they have been drinking, I know I was told flat out that I wouldn't be. And yes, they can tell if you have been (you will bleed more than usual). Ane really when it comes down to just you and the buzzing of the needle, your friends opinions don't matter *in the least*.

In American culture, people see it as stupid or impulsive. In other cultures, tattooing is a coming of age symbol, a symbol of strength. It really just depends on how people look at you, not how you look at yourself.

-- OperaDiva (solosoprano@juno.com), May 06, 2003.


Response to Tatoo's - where should a catholic stand

Uh.....didn't the early Christians tattoo themselves for religious purposes?

rod. .

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 06, 2003.


Response to Tatoo's - where should a catholic stand

That I don't know....

-- OperaDiva (solosoprano@juno.com), May 06, 2003.

Response to Tatoo's - where should a catholic stand

I agree with GT on this, Victoria. I understand your concern. Is it a moral issue: more than 80% of the time yeas. People with tatooes tend to use drugs more, practice open love more,...

Jews still don't tattoo themselves. There is no New Testament scripture which says Jesus approved of tattoos. There is no case in Christian history of people tattooing themselves.

What do I suggest. Accept your daughter as she is now. Tell her of the implications. My sister was a case in point. She had tattoes before 18. She had them removed around 25. She is now a eucharistic minister. She covers whatever was left of them.

Movies, singers, athletes, they all tend to influence the young people. If we don't say anything, they will win.

-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egonzalez@srla.org), May 06, 2003.


Response to Tatoo's - where should a catholic stand

"practice open love more"
For the sake of discerning between "love" and "sex" lets use "free sex" here, since last time I checked there was nothing wrong with free love.

"New Testament scripture which says Jesus approved of tattoos"
Is there any part where he says he disproves?

-- OperaDiva (solosoprano@juno.com), May 06, 2003.


Response to Tatoo's - where should a catholic stand

Uh....people?

Would this count as being like a tattoo?

Isaiah 49:15-16

15"Can a woman forget her sucking child, that she should have no compassion on the son of her womb? Even these may forget, yet I will not forget you."

16"Behold, I have graven you on the palms of my hands; your walls are continually before me." (RSV)

But, this is the Lord speaking, remember that. So, in a way tattoos are implied way from the pagan use of tattooing.

Here is a rather quick and silly URL:

http://www.tat2me.com/tattoohistory.htm

rod

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.come), May 06, 2003.


Response to Tatoo's - where should a catholic stand

sorry, i meant "...to move away from the pagan use..."

rod. .

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 06, 2003.


Response to Tatoo's - where should a catholic stand

I'm wicked confused...

-- OperaDiva (solosoprano@juno.com), May 06, 2003.

Response to Tatoo's - where should a catholic stand

Here is a URL with one opinion on the subject: http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/2964/body-piercing.html

-- Mark (aujus_1066@yahoo.com), May 06, 2003.

Response to Tatoo's - where should a catholic stand

"I'm wicked confused... "

How is that? Why?

Now, I'm confused.

rod. .

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 06, 2003.



Response to Tatoo's - where should a catholic stand

OperaDiva, licensed tattoo parlors also check ID, but there are many places which could care less either about age or state of inebriation. I was just pointing out that she may find her options limited down the line, particularly if someone doesn't care for the statement the tattoo istself is making. Tattooing is not something very easily or cheaply undone, so it behooves one to think before getting a tattoo, particularly on areas of the body that are readily seen wearing normal dress.

People do make judgements on how you look, and even if they don't dismiss you out of hand, they do tend to look at you a little more closely than at someone somewhat more nondescript in appearance. Just a fact of life.

-- GT (nospam@nospam.com), May 06, 2003.


Response to Tatoo's - where should a catholic stand

I'm just not clear on what your quote says.

-- OperaDiva (solosoprano@juno.com), May 06, 2003.

Response to Tatoo's - where should a catholic stand

"it behooves one to think before getting a tattoo"
Don't get me wrong, I *totally* agree. I thought long and hard (3 years) before I got mine. It was a decision to commit to the direction in which my life is taking me. I love my tattoo. It isn't comething I will ever be ashamed of/not like. When I'm an old wrinkly lady it will be a fun thing to show the grandkids, ha ha. I feel sorry for people who get tweety or bugs tattooed on themselves. I mean, really. It's a life long decision, kind of like marriage. HA HA. Please, think about it first.

"People do make judgements on how you look, and even if they don't dismiss you out of hand, they do tend to look at you a little more closely than at someone somewhat more nondescript in appearance. Just a fact of life."
I don't dissagree with you here either. I am one of those people who doesn't care what other people think of me. What they choose to think before they know me is thier choice. If they want to judge, so be it. Whatever. I am a nice perosn. I care about the people around me, even if I don't know them or don't particularly like them. I know people think that I'm brash/to the point/sarcastic/pierced/tattooed. Good for them. I am all of those things, but I am also the first person that would push anyone out of the way of an on-coming car, no matter what it means for me. I don't need anyone to affirm any of these things, I already know that they are there.
And yea, I have to cover my tattoo in my line of work, but they have make-up for that, so it doesn't worry me any :D

-- OperaDiva (solosoprano@juno.com), May 06, 2003.

Response to Tatoo's - where should a catholic stand

OperaDiva, I knew someone (a Marine, no less) who actually had a Tweety Bird tattooed on her ankle! Too funny!

-- GT (nospam@nospam.com), May 07, 2003.

Response to Tatoo's - where should a catholic stand

I have friends that have those. I counselled them against it, but they did it anyway. Ach so, so ist das leben. Kids will do what they will.

-- OperaDiva (solosoprano@juno.com), May 07, 2003.

Response to Tatoo's - where should a catholic stand

Hee..hee..

"Tweety Bird".

Well, the Dixie Chicks claimed that it wasn't about the money, but they do put tattoos on their feet for every hit record.

I think that tattoos were once associated with paganism. So, to steer people away from those practices, tattoos took on a new purpose as my quote seems to indicate. The tattoo that really matters is the one the Lord shall place on His palms, if we are to interpret "graven" to mean tattoo.

rod. .

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 07, 2003.


Response to Tatoo's - where should a catholic stand

Just my two cents worth..

I have three tattoos.. one on each should and on my ankle ( I know that no on really cares hehe ) But By looking at me, you would not know that I have them..

I am proud to wear my art. I love Indian Hertiage and the Free Spirits of the Indians.. therefor I have feathers and a dream catcher. My future husband is Catholic and his family is very strong in their ways.. And none of them have a problem with them..

As to stereotype the fact that most people that have tattoos do drugs and drink .. is just kinda crazy..

I dont do drugs . Totally against it.. I do drink maybe twice a month..

But anyway.. I think getting art put on your body is ok.. just as long as it is tasteful and you know you will love in 40 years..

And I work for a Surgery Center in the Accounting Department.. So sometimes having art is not going to change the way you do your job or to get a job..

Just my thought..

-- Dawn (dejavue282002@yahoo.com), May 07, 2003.


Response to Tatoo's - where should a catholic stand

Rock on Dawn.

-- OperaDiva (solosoprano@juno.com), May 07, 2003.

Response to Tatoo's - where should a catholic stand

Well said Dawn,

It may be true that a high percentage of drug abusers have tattoos (I don't know if this is true or not). But if it is true, it is still logically invalid to say that therefore most people with tatoos abuse drugs. That is a false syllogism. It is like saying "most nurses have pierced ears; therefore someone with pierced ears is most likely a nurse". I know many respected professionals, including doctors and clergymen, who have tatoos. After all, they weren't born into those professions. They had to go through growing up just like the rest of us.

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), May 07, 2003.


Response to Tatoo's - where should a catholic stand

Don't forget about the benefit of having a distinctive tattoo. If you are killed in a gang fight or are the victim of a mob hit and all your identification, fingers, teeth, etc. are taken from you, a distinctive tattoo when matched to your prior prison records may give the authorities the ability to identify you.

Hee hee,

Frank

-- Someone (ChimingIn@twocents.cam), May 07, 2003.


Response to Tatoo's - where should a catholic stand

That is awesome Frank... ha haa.

-- OperaDiva (solosoprano@juno.com), May 07, 2003.

Response to Tatoo's - where should a catholic stand

OooooooooKaaaaaay.

Even Ricardo Moltaban on that fantasy island had a "tattoo".

rod. .

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 07, 2003.


Response to Tatoo's - where should a catholic stand

Uh......"Montalban".

rod. .

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 08, 2003.


Response to Tattoo's - where should a catholic stand

I am opposed to circumcision, tatoos, and pierced ears, especially on men. This is not a religious issue for me, and maybe not even a moral one. There was nothing wrong with the human body as it came from the manufacturer, so why make "improvements"? Fashion? Vanity? We have been told that the human body is the temple of the Holy Spirit, so one may suppose that it is deserving of some appropriate degree of respect. Body painting strikes me as festive and fun, or maybe warlike. At least it washes off.

-- Thomas P. Owens (mushware@yahoo.com), May 13, 2003.

Response to Tattoo's - where should a catholic stand

Where does that put haircuts, Thomas?

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 13, 2003.

Response to Tattoo's - where should a catholic stand

I suppose permantly altering a body made by God that is the temple of the Holy Spirit could be considered defacing.

However, the part of us that is made in the image of God is the soul, and while the temple is the body, I think God means stuff more along the lines of: don't kill it slowly. (ex: smoking, drinking excessivly, cutting off your limbs for amusement... etc)

I think the tattoo/piercing issue is more, personalizing the temple, like... getting new curtians?

But I totally agree about circumcision. Ha ha, I'm *such* a hypocrit.

-- OperaDiva (solosoprano@juno.com), May 13, 2003.

Response to Tattoo's - where should a catholic stand

FOR ME...

the answer is very simple:

1. as long as it does not distance me from God.

2. as long as it does not distance another from God.

Of course, many might get offended by my actions, so number (2) isn't as simple as I thought. So, scratch number (2) and make it situational among close friends.

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 13, 2003.


Response to Tattoo's - where should a catholic stand

If your tattoo (provided it doesn't read something like: bow to satan stupid humans, or something like that/picture/words/whatever) distances someone else from God, he/she is a moron.

-- OperaDiva (solosoprano@juno.com), May 13, 2003.

Response to Tattoo's - where should a catholic stand

Scratch that. If a person is of weak enough (personal) ideals to let something as silly as a tattoo distance him/her from God, it doesn't matter *what* the tattoo in question says, he/she didn't really do the God thing anyhow. And if he/she did? Then he/she *really* is a moron.

-- OperaDiva (solosoprano@juno.com), May 14, 2003.

Response to Tattoo's - where should a catholic stand

Hi OperaDiva.

Well, that's just my point. If indeed we have a responsibility for our neighbors, and they happen to be complete idiots, then we should be careful how we might influence them. If eating meats offered to idols doesn't bother me because I kow better, it may bother a weaker person, so I'll have the salad so as not to weaken my brother even more. Or, something like that. It isn't that the tattoo is bad; it is the effects it will cause for others. Doesn't this idea conform to the "communal" concept of salvation in the Catholic Church????

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 14, 2003.


Response to Tattoo's - where should a catholic stand

I saw two big men the other night at a cafe. One of them had what looked like part of the Last Supper scene tattoed on his upper arm. Yes, these were big men with big arms. At first, it struck me kind of odd to see such a tattoo. I then became comfortable and peaceful knowing that I was around God fearing people. I would not have known this had it not been for the body art. I don't get a comfortable feeling around people with dragons and daggers drawn into their bodies. I'm sure that if we were stuck in an elevator for an hour or so, I would get to know them better, but the thought of being confined in a small room with a shaven head, pierced eyelids, pierced tongue, and tattooed with skulls kind of person does put me a little off. I have to wonder if that is the effect these people are wanting. You know. Body art and minor mutilation is only a small little indulgence. It can be extremely grotesque and there has to be a beginning to such deviant doings. It is like all things, everything in moderation.

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 14, 2003.

Response to Tattoo's - where should a catholic stand

Rod, I believe that Jesus would not turn away people who had tattoes on their bodies. But these are people who are unbelievers or who have no religious training. Or lapsed Christians who are not committed to any Christian faith.

For those who were born Christians, who carry on the name of Christ, the Apostle Paul had this to say:

1 Corinthians 6 19 Have ye not known that your body is a sanctuary of the Holy Spirit in you, which ye have from God? and ye are not your own, 20 for ye were bought with a price; glorify, then, God in your body and in your spirit, which are God's.

Since our body is a temple of God , then, we must keep it holy, this includes the absence of tattoes.

-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egonzalez@srla.org), May 14, 2003.


Response to Tattoo's - where should a catholic stand

Rod, I believe that Jesus would not turn away people who had tattoes on their bodies. But these are people who are unbelievers or who have no religious training. Or lapsed Christians who are not committed to any Christian faith. For those who were born Christians, who carry on the name of Christ, the Apostle Paul had this to say: -- Elpidio Gonzalez

Hey Elpidio,

Is this not a little judgemental ?? My best friend in the world is a Catholic and a very Faithful Catholic.. She is very active in her church.. And well she has several tattoos and many piercings. And no one in her church has a problem with her and/or her art. Please do not assume that just because people have tattoos are Non- Believers or have lapsed in their faith.. Because frankly that is an untrue statement.

-- Dawn (dejavue282002@yahoo.com), May 14, 2003.


Response to Tattoo's - where should a catholic stand

I have been in the teaching business 21 years, dawn.

From observation and questioning my students( here I am talking about those with tatooes, tongue pierced,...) is that they don't know who God is.

They tend to be nonjudgmental on others. For them homosexuality is OK. Having sex before marriage is OK. Having multiple partners is OK. Abortion is OK. Having sex for the sake of having sex is OK. Using contraceptives is OK. Living together without being married is OK.... the list goes on.

Drinking and eating are necessities for the body. Tattoeing tends to be a sign of rebellion. In the old days it was cigarretes, mariguana, cocaine, opium, LSD, ...

-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egonzalez@srla.org), May 14, 2003.


Response to Tattoo's - where should a catholic stand

Unfortunately that sounds like a description of the typical student of today, not tatooed students.

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), May 14, 2003.

Response to Tattoo's - where should a catholic stand

As a tattooed individual, I don't like people generalizing and dumping me into categories without asking first. I find this problem with a lot of aspects about my life. Like... I'm Catholic so I must not read the Bible. I sing opera so I must be a preppy. Things like that... It's just silly to generalize like that.

-- OperaDiva (solosoprano@juno.com), May 14, 2003.

Response to Tattoo's - where should a catholic stand

Hi Elpidio.

Uh, I've been in the business of teaching for 18 yrs. That means that you are way older than me, he.he.h..

I'm thinking that an ideal situation would be when people put God first in their lives and everything else in its own priority.

I've been very fortunate to have taught in schools where the students seem to have a solid foundation in Christianity, namely Catholicism. It is very comforting to see many of my students preparing for their First Communion (as a music teacher I get to teach the whole school). Of course, the Protestant kids are also solidly based in their faith. Something happens as they grow. Elementary kids are easy in accepting God and it would be wonderful if they could keep the faith as they mature. Peer pressure starts to destroy that faith, it seems. The rebellion begins with fashion statements. Oh, sure, the school can make attempts to control this rebellion with school uniforms, but this really makes thing worse.

You kow what? Rebellion starts once we are born; it becomes more apparent when our fashions change.

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 15, 2003.


Response to Tattoo's - where should a catholic stand

I know that other students besides tattooed ones are in the same boat.

Opera Diva, did you find you find Jesus after or before you put on the tattooes, or You have always been a faithful believer?

Rod, I have always been in public schools except my first year back in 1971. I was nine then. My kids go to public schools. I have been working in public schools for 21 years. The majority of the population attends public schools.

What I have seen now is a different proliferation o ideas that were not there before.

It started with heavy metal music in the 1980s. It introduced the concept of the devil.Then came the Gothic style. This introduced the idea of the new Witches = self called Wiccans. Also lesbianism.

Lesbianism is becoming more prevalent now.

-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egonzalez@srla.org), May 15, 2003.


Response to Tattoo's - where should a catholic stand

There's something very deliberate and provocative about the love of tattoos. Either that, or something perverse and irresponsible.

Irresponsible, since, as one of you said before, many young folks do this under the influence of alcohol, drugs, or peer pressure. Those are not sane motives for printing anything on your skin which likely will never be erased.

My father was drunk (He told us--) in his youth, and had tattos put on both his arms. He regretted it all his life, especially because his own dad really lambasted him for it.

The decision to get a tattoo is perverse and antisocial as well because it shows a disregard for what others may think. It's playing the cool dude; or worse, the THUG. For a girl, it's showing her wild side. (Not that some cute, inoccuous, even insipid girls aren't wild.) In other words, it's a foolish sin against modesty.

Most of all when a girl tattoos her tail-bone. That borders on indecent. What possible need would a young woman have; to draw attention to the cleft in her butt? I feel sorry for a kid that dumb. Is she in sin? I let God judge that. I just call it a gliitering example of stupidity.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), May 15, 2003.


Response to Tattoo's - where should a catholic stand

Ouch! Eugene.

That may get under someone's skin. he.he.he.h....

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 15, 2003.


"Opera Diva, did you find you find Jesus after or before you put on the tattooes, or You have always been a faithful believer?"
I'm a cradle Catholic.

Here we go Rod ;)

"The decision to get a tattoo is perverse and antisocial as well because it shows a disregard for what others may think. It's playing the cool dude; or worse, the THUG. For a girl, it's showing her wild side. (Not that some cute, inoccuous, even insipid girls aren't wild.) In other words, it's a foolish sin against modesty."

So, we should all do what society wants us to do, for fear that it might upset someone if we don't? Wow. I wonder whom I have hurt by not taking drugs, not having abortions, not had random sex with people the times I've been asked. What a heartless person I am.
I am of the belief that I should only do things that agree with the beliefs that I have, whether other people agree with my decisions or not. You are right in thinking that I don't care what other people think of me. Not because I want people to think I'm a bad girl, but because if they choose to pass judgement on me, WITHOUT KNWOING ME, then that eliminates the quickly and quietly from anyone that I would want to associate with. Who was it that said "You can't please everyone all of the time?" I don't remember (Lincoln maybe). I don't try to, it's kind of pointless. (and stupid)
I'm a girl too, and I'm not wild. I am prolly one of the most boring people ever. I like to read, I listen to opera and folk music. I have a tattoo. Broad generalizations are silly, and stupid. Oh, and I'm not immmodest. Cause I don't think people should think I'm an object.

-- OperaDiva (solosoprano@juno.com), May 17, 2003.

*knowing*
*them*


-- OperaDiva (solosoprano@juno.com), May 17, 2003.

Hi OperaDiva.

I think Elpidio is getting me into hot water with his reply.

"You can't judge a book by its cover" (Mark Twain?), but so many people do just that.

If we are gonna start judging people or criticizing them for having tattoos and such, we may as well include ourselves in the bunch, too. Not having tattoos on our flesh does not make us immune to any unrighteousness. At least , this is what I've concluded from Scriptures.

Also, when anything turns into a vice it becomes our master; this is wrong. It could be anything. "Vice" means obsession, means distance from God.

Sure, it is tough at times to put aside simple prejudice and make an effort to see beyond the flesh and know the real person inside. We should work at knowing the real person. I believe that those who are true believers can accept the person not by their sins/deeds, but by the same acceptance that Jesus has for each one of us. How else can the lost soul be saved unless we bring them into the Word?

I don't know what condition the Apostle Paul suffered with that would have caused his followers to want to turn away in disgust. Yet, they put the flesh to one side and Paul's teachings at the focal point. They put God's teachings first.

I'm not sure that I could ever accept some tattoos. Some look very pleasing. I could accept the person once we get to know each other a little better.

OperDiva-Did you think that I wrote that quote

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 17, 2003.


I knew the post I submitted would unhinge somebody. It's too bad.

Styles come and go. Tattooing is a rock-fan style with the girls. It was just starting during the hippy rebellions of 1960 on up. Janis Joplin did her best to stick out like a cheap tramp, covering herself with blue tattoos. It was openly flashing her lack of morals. -- Cher does the same, and how many others?

It's the same with young men. They emulate Bad Boys; the thugs on the basketball court, or the prize ring. It's all for showing off. Not for aesthetics; what could be farther from beauty?

But, it's a free country. If young ladies nowadays yearn to appear loose & liberated by picking up the latest ridiculous fetish, they are free to do it. I respect the ones who resist those temptations. But who cares what I think? I'm a 65 yr old conservative. Next thing somebody'll be calling me the fascist in this forum. Ho-hum. . .

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), May 17, 2003.


"OperaDiva-Did you think that I wrote that quote "
No I didn't. I knew you were expecting Eugenes post to ruffle some feathers. :D

unhinge - To render unstable or wavering; to unsettle; as, to unhinge one's mind or opinions; to unhinge the nerves.
I am not unstable or unhinged in any way. I just take offence when people thow me into a category.

"Next thing somebody'll be calling me the fascist in this forum."
I didn't call you anything, save judgmental. You on the other hand, all but call me a tramp.
Once again we go with the broad generalizations, which get an intelliegent argument nowhere. You have your own opinion, and are entirely entitled to it. You may think what you like, it is, as they say, up to you.

-- OperaDiva (solosoprano@juno.com), May 17, 2003.

Just don't worry about it, then, Opera Diva.

Pay no attention.

I have not called you the tramp. The cheap tramps are Janis Joplin and Cher and their like. I know many good girls like their tattoos. But why identify with the lower common denominator? Does Dame Joan Sutherland sport a butt tatto? Not likely. She knows better. It's the role models who introduce these trends whom I attack. They have supporters, obviously. If you were offended by a drunken, shaking, stamping queen of rock like Joplin, why ever would you emulate her fashions? You will never be a cheap tramp. But she was; (God forgive), and Cher, all the other trend-setters. They are below you.

Your Dad & Mom invested a great deal in you. Why not emulate their values? Modesty and humility; out in the world? You have it in you to be a saint; and that's what you should be.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), May 17, 2003.


I'm sure Dame Joan doesn't have a tattoo. Why? I don't know.

The only thing I try to be is the best person I can be. I think my parents are proud of me. They aren't really worried about a tattoo, because they know, with or without the tattoo, I am the same person.

-- OperaDiva (solosoprano@juno.com), May 17, 2003.

Well, ya better be! The tattoo isn't going away, so why cry now? That is the sorry side of it. But God still loves you. Wish I'd been able to stop you before you made that mistake. It's like smoking; somebody has to grab you quick, before you light one up. You would've thanked me someday.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), May 17, 2003.

I'm sure I will never be sorry of the tattoo that I have. I have had it for a year now and never tire of it. I'm glad that you weren't there to stop me, not that you would have been able to. ;)

I got some wise counseling from my elders, took it under consideration, and went on with the plans to get mine, because I thought wanting if for about four years was sufficent for me.

-- OperaDiva (solosoprano@juno.com), May 17, 2003.

Correction: almost two years. Time flies.

-- OperaDiva (solosoprano@juno.com), May 17, 2003.

OperDiva-

Eugene machs du viel schmerzen,ja?

Don't let him get to you. Uh, my german is a little rusty. I hope I didn't say anyting stupid.

rod. .

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 17, 2003.


I just read everyones responses from day one...wow...you guys really got into this one.....well I am 16 and I just got confirmed today well i guess since its 12:29 it would be yesterday and i was thinking of getting a cross with the symbol of the holy spirit around it.....would this be a bad idea? I'm still going to talk to my pastor about this too. I just figured i would see what you guys had to say

-- Jake (bigpimpn44@yahoo.com), May 18, 2003.

Very bad idea, Young Man--
Your body's a temple of the Holy Spirit. Graffitti doesn't belong on the Church doors. You asked and that's what I say.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), May 18, 2003.

Er macht mich wahnsinnig nicht. Es macht mich traurig, dass er denkt dass Leute so schnell wären, zu beurteilen, wegen eines tattoo.

;)

-- OperaDiva (solosoprano@juno.com), May 18, 2003.

Jake-

Have you considered wearing a small cross, medallion, or a rosary instead of a tattoo?

I'm just wondering....

rod. . Hay carambas...war ist mein buch?

.

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 18, 2003.


OperaDiva-

Ich habe den Eindruck, dass ist wegen aeltere Leute.

I probably butchered the grammer.

I'm sure that Eugene means well, like strong medicine.

rod. .

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 18, 2003.


Ha ha, Ich weisse Rod :D

-- OperaDiva (solosoprano@juno.com), May 18, 2003.

As I vass sayin to Zu Zu lest nacht:

Crezzy brodt! Vass mitt der schwaztika tattooen on das leg???

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), May 18, 2003.


Ha. My tattoo is perfectly harmless. It's a little treble clef. :D

-- OperaDiva (solosoprano@juno.com), May 18, 2003.

Ja! Eine Kleine Nacht Musik.

rod. .

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 18, 2003.


I would like to know if those that support tatoo's support Graffiti, becuase it is exactly what you are doing to your body. For instance the idea that your body is home to your soul, would any of you go outside and paint garbage on the walls of your own home, doubtful.

Why not let your body & soul appreciate in spitritual value instead of defiling it. All of us beleive in the day we will stand before Christ - I hope you people with tatoo's have got reasons in your explanation for having them.

-- grechen (gsofiren1@yahoo.com), May 22, 2003.


Hi grechen.

Grafitti or Fresco? You know something can be art while something else can be trash.

I've often wondered about the Holy Spirit being in our "temple". Some would say that tattoos defile the body and so the Holy Spirit would not want to be in our "temple". But, what about when our "temple" is diseased or mutilated by an accident or illness, would the Holy Spirit still be in us. We do bring on disease and risk our bodies everyday as we drive our cars. Where does this put the tattoo?

I know that having a tattoo is a deliberate action by the person and disease can be a result of reckless behavior, but the intention of that deliberate action is perhaps the real issue. If I knew that a person with aids needs my help and that my reckless contact might cause me to contract aids, should I help that person anyway? (AIDS is only an example, I know how it is transmitted.) If the guy at the local cafe has a tattoo of the Last Supper because that's his way of spreading the Gospel, is that acceptable?

If the person with a skull and demon tattoo later sees the "light", is he/she ok then?

rod.

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 22, 2003.


I love Rod. Ditto what he said.

-- OperaDivaCecilia (solosoprano@juno.com), May 22, 2003.

Yes, but I'm scooting my desk over a bit before Eugene hits me with a ruler or something. We all love each other, but I'm not sure Eugene will love my previous reply. With eyes squinting and muscle flinching I'm waiting for Eugene's reply. You might want to scoot your desk over a bit , too.

rod.

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 22, 2003.


What about it will he have a problem with?

-- OperaDivaCecilia (solosoprano@juno.com), May 22, 2003.

Rod,
I've never tried to condemn someone for tattooing themselves. I never said it was a sin. I even admitted my own father had tattoos.

All I said is, printing something on your clean, (especially women) beautiful skin, which may never come off again is -- STUPID. It's wrong because it's faddish. And nothing faddish ought to command your respect or admiration. Right now, it's the fad for men to shave off all their hair. It makes most of them look ridiculous. But, at least hair grows back out. It won't necessarily be ridiculous five years from now. But a tattoo on a woman will. Because the fad will pass.

Sorry, but tattoos will always indicate an immature mentality. It wouldn't have consequences, except you're not able to wash them off later. And they don't make you prettier, or smarter, or richer. Paint is for kitchens and bathrooms and cars. Not for human beings. It's a no-brainer!

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), May 22, 2003.


"(especially women)... It won't necessarily be ridiculous five years from now. But a tattoo on a woman will... And they don't make you prettier, or smarter, or richer."

Why especially women?
How will it be ridiculous simply because one is female?
Ought one aspire to be prettier and richer?

-- OperaDivaCecilia (solosoprano@juno.com), May 22, 2003.

Dear OD:
Look at my context. ''. . . on a woman it will. Because the fad will pass.'' I mean, five years or more from now, when the tattoo will stick out like a black eye. It will ''date'' your style as completely vulgar (again). You may not think so. Just wait, and you'll see. (I'm sorry; but you asked.)

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), May 22, 2003.

Hi Eugene.

I think my point was that the intent of the action would be in question of being sinful, not the action. Each person will have a like or dislike of tattoos and decide if those tattoos are grafitti or fresco. You know, trash or art?

rod.

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 22, 2003.


Mine is a fresco :D
Hmm. So, it is a fad, that will pass, only for women?
Mine won't stick out. It isn't anywhere where anyone can see it unless I show them for that precise reason. I didn't get it for anyone, to make anyone happy, or to participate in som silly trendy thing. I got it for me, because it is something that means a lot to me, because everytime I see it I smile about how brave I was. It is a work of art, a personal touch, that I added to the work of art that God gave me.

-- OperaDivaCecilia (solosoprano@juno.com), May 22, 2003.

Maybe I ought to qualify all my previous objections. They are meant generally speaking, not as a personal poke at you.

You're not affecting me in any way. I still say you're a good person. You can't be all bad, if opera is your game. Lol!

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), May 23, 2003.


"Maybe"...? How about definately?

Eugene, you saw how if made her feel and it took you this long to make ammends?

Ok, meet the new Rod. My humble nature has taken its toll. I'm gonna follow in the footsteps of John and Eugene.

Rod

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 23, 2003.


Dear OperaDivaCecilia,

What does your family think of your tatoo's? Just curious.

Karl

-- Karl (Parkerkajwen@hotmail.com), May 23, 2003.


Rod, Not making amends; since I haven't offended or sinned against charity. Just spoke my mind. Nevertheless, would like Diver to know it's not a putdown.

Karl:
When I was a kid, what my parents told me was law. I cared, if it hurt them. Wonder if the present generation even knows what I'm talking about?

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), May 23, 2003.


Dear Eugene,

Some do some don't. Alot depends upon the condition of their household. Mine was a mess with my divorce and all. My children have suffered immensely for years from both of their parents mistakes.

I do not mind my children's tatoo's, at least those I know about. I know one of my daughter's told me long before she got one that she was thinking long about it. I told her my feelings and I am certain she listened to them and considered them. That is how she is. She got it. If she like it, then I am happy for her. She is an adult and I must leave her decisions to her. She got the Tatoo as an adult. She did not disrespect me and do it as a child. That speaks to her character. I am proud of her.

If my other children were more like her I think they would all be better off. But I love them all and hope they feel the same. They have a tough, loving father. I wish I were perfect for them.

By the way, Eugene, thanks for asking.

Karl

-- Karl (Parkerkajwen@hotmail.com), May 23, 2003.


Eugene, I don't think that what you say is directed at me. However, I do get irritated with the "if a woman get's one" double standard blah blah thing. Only because I'm female and I'm sure you understand, double standards get old quickly.

My family. Well, my Dad doesn't hate it, but I know he thinks it is silly. But he likes music so I'm sure that he really doesn't have a problem with it. My mother doesn't like it so much but she doesn't hate it.

Ha ha Eugene, here we go again. Yes, I knew my parents thoughts on the issue before hand. I asked both of them what they thought. I got (from my mother): "Not while you live at my house." From my father: "I don't think it's a good idea, but it's your body." I took that into consideration, decided that, yes it is my body, but if someone is really gonna get offended by a little treble clef, they have bigger problems than my tattoo. I got it. They don't really mind, but my mother cringes when she sees it... She is a chicken... lol. I do care what my parents think, but I also give them credit for being adults and understanding of the fact that, while I am and will always be thier child, I am one as well... It was a positive experience for me.



-- OperaDivaCecilia (solosoprano@juno.com), May 23, 2003.

ODC,

What about putting a little bass clef behind an ear? No one would know it's there unless told, and it *might* be the only one on the planet

Frank

-- Someone (ChimingIn@twocents.cam), May 24, 2003.


How about Handels' complete "Messaiah"?

Rod... .

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 24, 2003.


I see that having a tatoo can certainly be a good conversation piece. Especially on the internet. I do recall the scriptural advice regarding all things in moderation. Now, I do believe that only applies to good thing and neutral things. Certainly not bad things.

Wine is nice. Jesus drank it. Priests drink it all the time (at Mass, please no inference here otherwise). But if it it overused it can get very bad. Moderation. Myself, I rarely drink wine.

When I was a child I remember getting quite a kick out of those removable, wash off tatoos. So I guess I actually took that first step down the slippery slope to being a circus attraction(please I mean no attack on those who have lots of tatoos, although I would have discouraged them along thier way with each tatoo if they were to ask me)

My own concern is for the long term effects of the tatoo(s). I know that each cut, even sun damage we get to our skin can cause permanent damage, alot of which is not reversible. I do not know the effects of a permanent dye in the deeper layers of the skin in the long term. For me any foreign stuff I introduce, which would never be there otherwise, is an iffy subject.

I guess, if there could be developed a clinically safe, biodegradable tatoo dye developed I would feel much more comfortable. To me a solitary tatoo is a neutral issue.

The jury is out for me on this one although, I think the reasons for tatoos are very important to understand as well. But, each adult has the right to chose as they please, even if they disagree with me.

I will remain in the school of all things in moderation, always keeping my lookout for that incline which could lead me where I would not want to go but which I might not be aware of from my first few steps down that beautiful, satisfying path.

Karl

-- Karl (Parkerkajwen@hotmail.com), May 24, 2003.


I read somewhere that the wine, back then, was not really alcohol. It was kept in a "caked" condition and water was added to it in order to make it fluid. It was described as "grape juice". I don't know how accurate their descriptions are. It was a Protestant article on abstaining from alcohol. It also seemed to imply that the "wedding" miracle of the water turning to wine was the result of some of that left-over "cake" in the vessels, which were activated. Uh, silly idea in my opinion.

Rod.

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 24, 2003.


I'm sure it was some sort of fermented something or other although the recipe for wine hasn't remained exactly the same for thousands or years, you know? That would be near to impossible.

I agree that scar tissue is a bad thing to have and of course it is not the smartest thing to put permanant ink under the skin. But nothing left on this planet anymore is natural and I suppose if, by no fault of my own, I'm going to be stuck eating genetically engineered food covered with pestacide and filled with growth hormones... well, a little tattoo really doesn't matter that much. I'm actively killing myself anyhow by breathing. :)

Not Handels whole Messiah. For one, it's too long, for another, it wasn't his best oratorio anyhow. :)

-- OperaDivaCecilia (solosoprano@juno.com), May 24, 2003.

I was gonna say Wagner's "Ring", but this would mean putting on some weight.Oooh, I just remembered, "Elektra"!

Rod. . .

.

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 24, 2003.


Dear Rod,

Yes, very silly idea, and a glaring example of how far some people will go in twisting scripture to support their own ideas. This is a principle reason why personal interpretation of scripture is so dangerous. Human nature being what it is, people will always interpret in a way that will support their own opinions.

The only place you will ever find such absurd notions about wine in biblical times is exactly where you did find it - in the writings of Protestant sects which forbid the use of alcohol on supposedly moral grounds. It is a real stumbling block for these folks that their Savior, GOD in the flesh, personally did what they are trying to claim is fundamentally immoral. But in fact, He did - and it isn't. They also have a problem with 1 Tim 5:23, which is a direct instruction to do exactly what they are claiming is immoral! The only way out of this dilemma is to claim that the "wine" of scripture is not really "wine", but non-alcoholic grape juice. Unfortunately for them, the scriptures are full of passages which indicate just the opposite.

Eph 5:18 instructs us "do not become drunk with wine" Addiction to wine is mentioned in 1 Tim 3:3; Titus 1:3, 1:7

After Pentecost the Apostles, on fire with the Spirit, were behaving rather strangely by human standards. Onlookers said "they are full of sweet wine" (Acts 2:13) Peter responded "these men are not drunk, as you suppose (Acts 2:15)

Drunkenness (not drinking!) is described as a vice in many passages, including Matt 11:19; Matt 24:49; Luke 7:34; Luke 12:45; Luke 21:34; Rom 13:13; 1 Cor 5:11; 1 Cor 6:10; Gal 5:21; 1 Pet 4:3. There is no record of any alcoholic beverage used in that culture except wine.

Matt 9:17 says no-one puts new (unfermented) wine into old wineskins, or they will burst and the wine will be lost. The reason they burst of course was the gasses caused by fermentation - the same fermentation which produced the alcohol.

At Cana, the chief steward says "normally the best wine is served first, then after the guests have drunk a while, a lesser vintage". The implication here is obvious. When they first start drinking, they will notice how good the wine is, but after a few glasses they are too crocked to notice.

So, passages like these lead us to the astounding conclusion that the Bible really means what it says! And when it says WINE, it means WINE!

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), May 24, 2003.


The main question in this thread was tattooing, and what a Catholic should believe.

It's hard to call it a sin. It may or may not be a sin against modesty. Maybe that's why O.D. thinks I cite a double standard. A woman in the Christian sense is careful of the image she presents to the world. I don't have to elaborate.

The man must be modest as well. I think many things men do in the world is sinful and immodest. In confusing the gender distinction. Men are offensive in women's garb. It doesn't have to be mentioned they're almost universally sinful in machismo & speech. Or to mention effeminate style in haircuts, clothes and narcissism before their mirror. So-- there's no double standard. I find (not the Church, just me--) excessive makeup, tattooing and/or masculine garb ridiculous for women. Women simply don't care these days. They actually dress to appear masculine; and a tattoo is the same kind of fashion statement. Which is a shame. Finally, I will concede, something as inoccuous as what Opera Diva claims to have, a musical symbolism, might not be excessive. It's not for me to say. (It's NOT your body exclusively, Diva-- It's God's temple as well, and it will be shared with your spouse and children someday, hopefully. For that reason only, it should be treated as a very sacred property.)

Women's bodies, particularly young girls, ought to be as clean and spotless as the holy altar. That goes for men; not just women. --But everyone wants to be free from all correction and untouchable. Which is pride. (Another subject.)

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), May 24, 2003.


Hi Eugene.

I like your thoughts. Yes, it "ought" to be the way you've described. It should also be a world of people without sin. But, we are just plain sinners. So, then, you are making a strong connection with the soul and the flesh. I guess it would be just like the Corinthians who believed that everything that is significant deals with the soul/spirit. This belief lead to a free for all with the fleshly needs or desires. Afterall, they believed, the flesh means nothing so anything goes. Here comes Paul with the teaching of "temple of the Lord".

It seems like the tattoo is a manifestation of the sin that begins in the mind. The flesh is at the bottom of the list of culpables. Then, wouldn't this also apply to many other things we do to our bodies? What, then, would be considered acceptable? Many denominations have their dress codes and rules of behavior. Remember those veils women wore to Mass? I believe that the Pentecostals require dresses, not pants, on woman. Sort of like what you've mentioned in your write-up.

I'm against dress codes, unless there is an extremely good reaso

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 24, 2003.


Hmm. I think that it depends on society. In American society a tattoo might appear to be masculine, but that is *only* because that is what we are tought to think. In African society, tattooing is practiced on both sexes. As for the cothing issue, clothing styles have been changing for thousands of years, I don't buy into this idea that God made men to wear pants and women to wear skirts. I think that is yet another thing that society dictates.

-- OperaDivaCecilia (solosoprano@juno.com), May 24, 2003.

*taught
*clothing

-- OperaDivaCecilia (solosoprano@juno.com), May 24, 2003.

Dear Ops Diver:
I quote your last piece; ''I don't buy this idea that God made men to wear pants and women to wear skirts. I think it's another thing that society dictates.'',/i>

Yes; YOU think. Society thinks. You accept that, you ''don't buy'' what the church may buy? and that makes you right?

The thread here is ''What should good Catholics think?'' Society is not entitled to dictate anything! Society today, Dear, sucks--!

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), May 24, 2003.


OH.
African society? Now African society makes something all right for Catholics? Maybe we all could run around stark naked. Or carry spears? HA!

Those are just the high notes, Diva-- Lol!

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), May 24, 2003.


In response to Eugene C. Chavez's comments regarding Janis Joplin: Because Janis had three tattoos: a bracelet on her left wrist, a flower on her right heel, and a heart on her chest you are saying she was a tramp and a bad girl. That is ridiculous and you are ignorant and very close-minded. You call her the Queen of Rock and then say why emulate her? You make no sense. After she passed away, many women got a tattoo of a heart on their chest to remember her. Because she had 3 tattoos, you say she is below this OperaDiva, please. You are mistasken. Also, you say she covered herself with blue tattoos; wrong again. As I stated above, she had a bracelet around her left wrist, a flower on her right heel, and a heart on her chest. I don't know how that is COVERING. JANIS JOPLIN was not below anyone. Obviously, you have never really listened to her music or read any literature about her. How dare you make such a rude and obnoxious statement that someone who sings opera is above someone who sings rock and roll. That is preposterous and I am shocked by your ignorance. Go back to living under your rock. To conclude, I find it interesting that you were offended by JANIS JOPLIN - QUEEN OF ROCK yet you are discussing her 33 years after she passed away. PEARL FOREVER

-- Kate (JoliSmile23@aol.com), May 24, 2003.

Kate,
I dare; and what has that got to do with you? If you like that junk, go for it. This is a free country.

Queen of Rock is like what? Royalty? Haha! Pearls before swine, says I. May she find peace and mercy. Her tattoos are at least buffed out now, poor thing.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), May 24, 2003.


Let me quote myself:

b>It seems like the tattoo is a manifestation of the sin that begins in the mind.

If a person's mind considers it a sin, it might be a sin for the person who thinks it. If a woman may not wear pants, then she may have to reconsider the job she is doing. Maybe it is wrong for women to have jobs which require wearing pants, hmm?

Uh, why would it be wrong for a woman to wear pants? Now, a man in a skirt would be funny! Except, of course, the Scotts and their bagpipes. Nothing funny there, expecially those bagpipes.

rod

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 24, 2003.


Yes, Rod:
Many young people --Catholics, too; do things which are nasty or improper, but do them without malice. They act innocently. But we have many excellent guides. We should learn from the good people, not from the ''daring'' ones. Not from the scandalous people who make trends. Intelligence is part of good taste. But many young folks haven't enough intelligence; they take their role models from MTV and rock ''stars''.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), May 24, 2003.

Woah, back down Eugene. I wasn't saying that I was "in the right". I was just saying that I don't buy into it. Does the curch have a rule about women wearing skirts? If so, I should like to see it.

As for the tattoos, ha ha. My point was made :) Time to go drink some vodka, it's carnival time!

-- OperaDivaCecilia (solosoprano@juno.com), May 24, 2003.

Eugene-

I believe that I made a similar comment higher up in this thread. Here is my comment:

Well, that's just my point. If indeed we have a responsibility for our neighbors, and they happen to be complete idiots, then we should be careful how we might influence them. If eating meats offered to idols doesn't bother me because I kow better, it may bother a weaker person, so I'll have the salad so as not to weaken my brother even more. Or, something like that. It isn't that the tattoo is bad; it is the effects it will cause for others. Doesn't this idea conform to the "communal" concept of salvation in the Catholic Church????

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 24, 2003.


Rod,

Scotsmen wear Kilts , not skirts - a different thing entirely. It borders on the sacrilegious to call a Kilt a Skirt!

The veils you were speaking of that females wore to church are called Mantillas. We all wore white ones when we were little, the ladies wore black or grey. It was traditional that girls wore some form of head covering, and boys did the opposite, i.e. they removed their caps.

Eugene,

When I went to High School in the seventies, our female teachers went on strike because they weren't allowed to wear trousers. The daft thing was, they could wear revealing tops, mini skirts etc...but no trousers. They won their case, and then the girls in the school also tried to have the no-trousers rule relaxed. Much to our chagrin we were unsuccessful and full school uniform with knee length grey skirts remained!

I now almost exclusively wear trouser suits to work. They're comfortable and smart, and I think much more decent than many of the fashions that one sees in the shops today.

They would also help to hide any ankle tattoos that might be lurking around from a misspent youth!

God bless

Sara

-- Sara (sara_catholic_forum@yahoo.co.uk), May 24, 2003.


Sara- I know they're called "kilts". A rose by any other name is still as sweet, or whatever. "Kilts" look like skirts, or is it skirts look like kilts?

Yes, I know about the "mantilla" my mom and grandmother would wear and the latin spoken for the mass.

I'm not poking fun at any of that. I'm trying to make a point about certain misconceptions about dress code or the fashion styles doctrines adopt.

And, I like those beenies the Jewish men wear. Go ahead Sara and tell the name of those beenies.

Rod.

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 24, 2003.


A Kippah, Rod :-)

God bless

-- Sara (sara_catholic_forum@yahoo.co.uk), May 24, 2003.


(paraphrased) Yes, the woman must cover her head while praying or prophesying. The man ought not to have his head covered, since he is the image and glory of God. The woman is the glory of man.

The woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels.

I Corinthians 11 tells it all.

I also read in the Bible about it being natural for the man to have short hair and the woman long like a veil. I can't remember where.

Timothy 2:9 teaches about how woman are to dress and behave. It would be good for woman to follow these teachings and men their instructions.

ro

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 24, 2003.


Sorry-

"women's hair" and "women" were the intended spellings.

I got nervous, my wife was looking over my shoulder as I typed.

rod. . .

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 24, 2003.


Uh, my wife is part Scottish, but purely woman. We have two "tattoos". One is 8 years old and the other will be 4 years old soon. They do tend to get under our skin, especially now that school is comming to a summer vacation.

Rod. . .

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 24, 2003.


I am a young practing Catholic with three tattoos (another to be done next week) and three piercings. This in any way does not stop me from practing my religion or make me a "rebel" or a bad person. My tattoos are not offensive to anyone. I do not think that because I have tattoos that I am sinning against God or doing anything wrong. This is my body and I am not hurting anyone else by doing this.

-- Erica Winkle (erica.winkle@us.army.mil), August 09, 2003.

Hi Erica.

I have one question for you:

Are you a 100% sure that you are correct in your thinking?

rod..

..

..

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), August 09, 2003.


From my 15 minute research, tatoos by themself are not immoral. Therefore, it should be viewed as an item of decency or morality on par with clothing/jewelry. I am thinking of getting a tatoo of a heart pierced by a sword as a reminder of who Jesus is to me and as an outreach to others in my age who are fascinated by the "what tattoo do you have" question. If God can use a bunch of poor fisherman to bring His Gospel to the world, maybe a tattoo can be used to bring it to a few other people.

Cheers, Jeff

-- Jeff (j1@yahoo.com), September 15, 2003.


Sure, Jeff,
If being a blithering idiot around others can bring a few people in, just go on. Be a total idiot. We're sure God will forgive you.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), September 16, 2003.

I.D.T.E.M.

"Idiota de Todo el Mundo" this sounds much funnier in spanish. I kind of see tattoos as a form of artificial stigmata. Maybe it will attract some to the Gospel? Yes, I can see an entire culture of young people proselytizing while flashing their meat- tenderized-skin art. I still don't understand the fascination with tattoos. But, if it is truly done for religious reasons, is it still a deviant practice? And, if it is done in the name of God, wouldn't this also be a freakish thing to do? What message is one making by "needle-izing" one's young flesh? There are other things that bring suffering to our lives much greater than that bloody practice of skin puncturing. There are other people in need of our care. When not direct our works for their needs and not those needles?

rod

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), September 16, 2003.


Your body and mind is your own. Tattoing is an ancient form of art, dating back centuries. How do you feel about your daughter having a free mind? How do you feel about raising an offspring to appreciate all this world can offer? Dont be naieve. Support her all you can. The time on this plane is only as long as is offered. Take every day as a gift. When will we all learn? It is an art, and art is in the eye of the beholder, it is her body after all, she could have done far worse. She has no needles sticking out of her arm. Be thankful for what you have got. A loving daughter that came home to you.

-- Anthony Swinbourne (ajswinbourne@yahoo.com), October 31, 2003.

i don't think anyone has really answered victoria's original question. i'm looking for guidance on this subject as well, but all i hear are ignorant assumptions that classify what a tattooed person is all about. no one knows that but God. also, we're not talking about a silly tweety bird.

so please allow me to rephrase the question: does the Church find it wrong to ink yourself in expression of showing love for Christ? what if the intent is truly to sing God's glory?...and not to shock/be immodest or whatever silly reasons i read. if our bodies are temples and need no further adornment then how is that any different from wearing a cross around your neck? both material matter is worn to show love for God. our Churches are adorned with the most beautiful art devoted to God that i've ever seen. i think the intent makes it different from disrespectful graffiti.

-- jen (nerdco@hotmail.com), February 11, 2004.


Well tattoo's , litteraly , it's damaging of your body , but that is not everyones view !! __ Personal , I wouldn't do it !! __ Also , some persons think tattoo's are just cool ?? __ Think twice !!

But , for example , indians also use tattoo's !!

Salut & Cheers from a NON BELIEVER:

-- Laurent LUG (.@...), February 11, 2004.


Jen, it a lot do do with traditions; what is and isn't good for a Christian. No one says these are sinful things.

But they offend against at least one virtue, modesty. Just as a girl's breasts are beautiful and pure in themselves, and she would never be ashamed of them, --They are not for display. You know the attention they'd attract is unwholesome in public. Modesty demands self-control, even if you acted without malice.

No one says a tatoo of itself is an evil. But modesty demands a sense of caution. The world will assume you're not modest, not very pure, nor religious. On the other hand, a body unblemished is at least modest. We would take it for the sign of inner strength; especially in these days when indecency abounds. Who are the ones in public life who sport tattoos and indecent garments? The rough-necks and bullies. Hel/l's Angels, rock singers, prostitutes.

My own Dad had a large tattoo on each arm. He'd bought them in a carnival, as a teenager, while drunk. He confessed this to us, his children. He told us his own father had punished him for doing this.

Though this was in ''olden times'' as the kids like to call it, it bothered my father even much later, as an elderly man. He always regretted it.

It will be regretted later on by you, too. Especially a girl; having branded herself for life with one particular lifestyle. Not with an artistic lifestyle. A loose one. Because that's what tattoos represent in this era. They're associated with drugs, crude women & hedonism. I'm sorry; I haven't exaggerated, that's merely the honest truth.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), February 11, 2004.


Gene:

I think that's the best post I ever read by you. You have a great sense of the essence of the Faith, a certain simplicity in expression that allows some of the most glorious teachings of the Catholic religion (especially w/ respect to the Blessed Mother and here in this case - the virtue of modesty) shine through.

Just wanted to let you know. Have a great day.

-- jake (j@k.e), February 11, 2004.


I appreciate that, Jake. You make many excellent contributions here all the time. We differ only in regards to the meaning of Sacred Tradition.

To me, the greatest of God's commandments always was and will be: ''Love one another as I have loved you.'' I'm sure you take it very seriously too.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), February 11, 2004.


For what it's worth, Gene, I've noticed the same thing and I admire your simplicity of Faith. My apologies for when I take aim at you for what I perceive as locking up the trads in the basement of the Catholic Church when guests are invited to The House, so to speak.

More patience with the trads maybe? It's an entirely Catholic concept imho that those who are good for nothing can be highly useful.

At any rate, three cheers for Eugene's faith in the Catholic Church, the Virgin Mary, the Blessed Sacrament and the virtues of simple faith in God.

-- Emerald (emerald1@cox.net), February 11, 2004.


Just as a note. Someone quoted the Lev. passage way up above. This is often used to say tattooing is wrong. I just wanted to mention that the Hebrew here actually reads, "mark the skin". Tattoo is our translation of that. If we look at the cultures that surrounded the Isrealites though, we see that many of them used 'ritual scarring'. This is probably what is being referred to in the text. It also makes more sense with the rest of the verse that talks of cutting yourself.

As for tattoos, I have a story:

When I was in discernment, I was playing touch football with a bunch of other young men in discernmenr. One guy had a big Celtic cross tattooed on his shoulder. In the course of play two guys had a big collision. After dusting himself off the one guy said, "All I saw was this enormous cross coming straight at me . . . I thought it was the end."

Anyway, I personally have never seen a tattoo that looked good. I suppose, in theory, there might ba a tatto that would look okay and not just be 'graffitti' but in practice I have never seen one.

Dano

-- Dan Garon (boethius61@yahoo.com), February 11, 2004.


Emmaus:
I see this very a propos: ,''I take aim at you for what I perceive as locking up the trads in the basement of the Catholic Church when ____guests are invited_____ to The House, so to speak.'' You perceive rightly. Guests ARE being invited, and the world won't accept just any invitation.

The Prodigal Son returned to his father's house mainly to be allowed in as a good-for-nothing who had been unfaithful. He was hoping to be a second- class citizen in his own house. But his father ran to meet him in the road. He ordered a cloak brought, and gave him a ring for his finger. He sent them to prepare a feast and roast the fatted calf.

That's what Vatican II is intended as; an act of our Almighty Father to gather all his children under the same roof again. He's eager to give up all claims against his sons, and welcome them home.

Remember that the elder son of this holy Father was offended because of all that feasting? He had been obedient; and now the bad son was receiving all the attention!

What are we to say someday; when He asks ''Where is your brother, the protestant?'' Do we reply, ''Am I my brother's keeper?''

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), February 11, 2004.


http://www.saint-mike.org/Apologetics/QA/Answers/Faith_Spirituality/f0306290286.html

Here's a link for y'all :) Congrats on working on the thread for almost a year now!!!

P.S. Mark Twain was a master of sarcasm - careful what you think when you read his quote, "Don't judge a book by it's cover." He could be saying that the complete opposite is what is true!

- Joe E.

-- Joe Eckstein (rc_jrockit@hotmail.com), February 26, 2004.


In response to the question "What about haircuts?":

For some, at least, hair grows back. The foreskin does not, nor does the tatooed flesh "Heal" itself. Pierced ears may close up of their own accord, but I'm not sure that matters.

I do not think that circumcision, tatooing, or pierced body parts are sinful, only that they are unseemly in the context of "unauthorized modificatons".

-- Thomas P. Owens (mushware@yahoo.com), March 16, 2004.


Before you all rant, yes that is my name, ive gone by it for many years now

I find all this to be rather funny... you are fighting over something that has been a part of the worlds culture for as long as there has been recorded history. I personaly was born and raised in a christian household, I had slipped into sin for many years, and have turned my life around... I am getting a Tattoo tomarrow that symbolizes to those of my church the new direction that my life has taken... I have discussed this with my pastor, and with my grandfather(retired moody prof.) and neither of them had any objections beyond ensureing that it was done by a professional shop. And as far as it being a defacement of the temple, well I've been severely marred by cancer allready, so I dont think that my tattoo will offend God any more than the massive scar that covers nearly my entire right side. And to the person who stated that the tattoing fad started in the 70's... umm, it started in the 1890's. Please read your history books before making comments like that, I did a report in college on fads from that era, probably still have it in an archive somewhere if ya want the references.

I drink, but not to excess I do beleave in the sanctity of marriage I cant spell despite many years of trying I beleave in open and free love, but not open and free sex

TheLoonie (Christian Nightwalker) Member in good standing of the Christian Church of the Night (we minister to those whose lives and carrers are after hours, you know the people who cant have sunday off because the lights must stay on, etc...)

-- TheLoonie (TheLoonieoutkast@yahoo.com), March 31, 2004.


Don't the meek inherit the earth? What is meek about a tattoo? Furthermore, don't do to yourself what you wouldn't do to your newborn child. (and that includes everything from nutrition to safety to pain to respecting the miracle that our bodies already are) Another thing to think about... let us focus on our insides rather than our outsides! Think of all the conversation ever spent on the subject of tatoos (not to mention money), and how it could have been spent doing something to make this world a little better... a meal for a hungry person. Are we so bored that we need to take useless things for ourselves? Consider this for anything in your life you don't really need.

-- prefer not to say (onesweetgirl@mac.com), April 02, 2004.

wow all these questions and answers to one question...I got my first tattoo a month ago, I've wanted one since I was in the third grade, and for years drew pictures all over my arms (and I am quite the artist) I now have a beautiful bright realistic looking four leaf clover on the front of my hip. everytime I see it I cant get over how beautiful it looks, and it was a logical tattoo, because I am of Irish decent, and the clover is the only luck symbol I believe in. I am personally unsure if there is a god, but if there is, he wont care what I do to my body, he will just be happy that I am a good person.

-- Jackie (drj_01@hotmail.com), August 18, 2004.

God does care what we do to our bodies. We are called to be good stewards of all that He has given us. However, a tattoo such as you describe doesn't do any actual harm to our bodies, and I doubt that He cares much about such a trivial matter.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), August 18, 2004.

Tattoos by themselves could not be harmful, but the intention and motives, ..a young girl...the base of spine..and abdomen. All this borders on to the sexual realm, which is most sacred to God. It is never, If your daughter is 22 years old.. It is her body.. and her life... We belong to God, so too our body is the temple of the Holy Spirit." The so-called little things sometimes could depict a grave condition of the soul. Eugene spoke exactly what I feel deep within and I believe what he spoke is also the heart of the church. It is better to be hurt a little in love than to be eternally lost.

-- Leslie John (lesliemon@hotmail.com), August 18, 2004.

From the Catholic Bible, Personal Study Edition.

"Do not eat meat with the blood still in it. Do not practice divination or soothsaying. Do not clip your hair at the temples, nor trim the edges of your beard. Do not lacerate your bodies for the dead, and do not tattoo yourselves, I am the Lord." (Leviticus 19, 26- 28)

I suppose I have to stop cutting my hair and shaving. Should I also not eat meat with dairy products? How many cubits must I walk from the city before I void? You get the idea? In the epistles Paul goes into great detail about interpreting the new and the old covenants with God. So does Jesus in the gospels. However, I think if I love God, and love my neighbor as myself, the tattoo ain't gonna' 'mount to much.

Bryon

-- Bryon Carter (askdingo@cox.net), November 07, 2004.


I've read all the way fom the top of this thread and I am still somewhat confused. Throughout all of this discussion, I've read a lot of different "opinions" about the topic of tattoo's but only a couple of BIBLE-BASED reasons (Lev.) It seems to me that all of you are giving YOUR opinion on tattoo's as well as other issues but not giving the opinions of the Bible- which is the only opinion that really matters.

-- Teresa Camp (tcamp@mail.hulldaisetta.isd.esc4.net), December 30, 2004.

Actually Teresa,

The teaching of the Church is what matters. The Bible tells you that whatsoever the Church binds on earth is bound in heaven. The Bible tells you that whoever listens to the Church listens to God. The Bible tells you that the Church is the foundation of truth. Do you believe what the Bible says or not? If you do, then you listen to the Church, because that's what the Bible says to do. The Church was providing its members with the fullness of truth before the Bible existed, and would be doing so today even if the Church had never compiled the Bible.

-- (PaulCyp@cox.net), December 31, 2004.


Well, this topic has fallen into familiar Protestant vs. Catholic stuff.

But back on topic, I did a search for "tattoos" on the Vatican website using Google, and I discovered an interesting anecdote.

"4. Adi-Vasi Pahnawas (=Costumes): We should preserve and perpetuate the traditional costumes of Adi-Vasi India and wear them on social occasions with pride, self respect and as a sign of self-identity. All the customs of mutual respect and greetings of guests have to be practiced scrupulously. Adi-Vasi dress, tattoos, etc. will make a colourful and lively scene in India."

People on the Move - Supp. N° 93, December 2003, pp.281-288

That's the Pontifical Council for the Pastoral Care of Migrants and Itinerant People.

So, this seems to imply at least that there is nothing inherently wrong with getting a tattoo. Thus it is not a participation in self-mutilation or anything like that.

The prohibition in Leviticus 19:28 is meaningful only insofar as it belongs to the First Commandment; for the ancient Jews, tattoos were (likely) unambiguously associated with contaminating Judaism with neighboring cults. Note the injunction, "I am your God."

Now for us, the same law exists--obviously it would be mortally sinful to get a tattoo like "I *heart* Cluthu" or something. That would be apostasy.

However, a more widespread prohbition of tattoos is at least philosophically defensible. The body is a temple--today, few people are thankful enough for their given bodies. Like breast implants and other drastic cosmetic surgeries, tattoos can be bought for sinfully vain reasons.

-- anon (ymous@god.bless), December 31, 2004.


It was probably in the first or second grade that I learned from a sister of Notre Dame that St. Pete does a look see when you knock on the pearly gates and if you got tatoos you got turned away.

I thinks to myself, "Well I guess that's it for dad and uncle Frank and most of the other men in my family."

Do they have a special place betweem heaven, hell, purgatory & limbo for the tatooed? I'll bet there are lot's of soldiers there.

I asked lots of other nuns about this and they all agreed.

My grandfather killed himself. They told me he went directly to hell.

Very confusing as a little kid all these rules



-- Chris Coose (ccoose@maine.rr.com), December 31, 2004.


Chris,

The reason this was all so confusing is that it wasn't "rules" you were being taught, but personal opinions. Obvious there will always be many conflicts between various people's opinions. In spite of what these sisters may have believed concerning tattoos, the Church has never taught any such thing. Therefore, there was no valid reason for them to believe such a thing, much less teach it to impressionable children.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), December 31, 2004.


"impulsive/reckless behavior (since usually one is drunk or being egged on by friends"

No.

Tattoos indicate possible gang membership and/or prison terms. Really scary to potential employers, especially as most such do not bother to keep the countries gang tatoos on file to differentiate the good ones from the gang ones.

Sean

-- Sean Cleary (seanearlyaug@hotmail.com), December 31, 2004.


Hi, Chris,
Happy New Year, welcome. I'm a Catholic taught by sisters myself. I recall some contradictions I had to accept; yet looking back, on balance my experiences have proven priceless. And I really think you're more than capable of understanding the Brides of Christ; possibly even better than I.

Nuns of the pre- Vatican era were conformed to standards of absolute purity and self-denial (Thanks be to God.) Nothing whatever that might deviate from the ideal was ever tolerated in the convent; much less a classroom. Some were over the top; we know it by hindsight. The anecdotal words you give us here are proof of this; and also of the immense benefits nuns brought us. Above all, unswerving faith. Dedication to God, even if it hurts.

This seems too extreme, looking back. But if we consider the secular forces that counterbalanced it in western society the last centuries, it can only be judged successful from a spiritual point of view.

We can see as adults how some of the crosses these nuns placed upon us were acts of humility; trusting in Our Saviour. We cut so much slack for the deviants and the malicious of our society. Why can't we do it for these holy women who dedicated themselves totally to God? If we inevitably link their spiritual combat against the world-- with Catholic doctrine pure & simple, doesn't it show how the world infects us and spoils us?

A tattoo can't hurt our soul. But scorn for our saints and holy people hurts a Christian soul; it lowers the bar for all humankind and leads to outrigh sin. Wouldn't you say?

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), December 31, 2004.


Dear Paul, When I said earlier, that I was relying on a Bible-based opinion perhaps I should have chosen a broader word choice. To clarify, I think that the arguement for/against tatoo's, and any other issue, should be based on Christian teachings. Of course where do we get our precepts for teaching-- the Bible. I was under the impression that the Christian religion was based on the teachings of the Bible. Many things were taught in the church before the compilation of the Bible but that doesn't mean that thye were correct teachings. My point in this arguement was that regardless of our opinions, circumstances, etc.- The Bible teaches that God's truths are absolute and universal. They do not change with circumstances, societal beliefs, nor with time. In society today, we have been taught to "interpret" laws, etc., to benefit ourselves. Whether right or wrong, we look for the loop-holes. I don't believe the Bible allows for loop-holes and since Lev. 19:28 says"Ye shall not... print any marks upon you:..." I think that makes the tatoo issue pretty cut and dry.

(By the way, I don't think anyone is going to burn in Hell because of a tatoo, I just think we often do things out of vanity that we shouldn't. I think that it seperates us from God and when we take such actions, we should ask for forgiveness. Remember, to God, sin is sin, no matter what our rating scale on Earth is.)

-- Teresa M. Camp (tcamp@mail.hulldaisetta.isd.esc4.net), January 02, 2005.


Theresa, we agree with you in essence. However, I wonder why you maintain this: ''Many things were taught in the church before the compilation of the Bible but that doesn't mean that they were correct teachings.'' (snip) You're absolutely wrong, Dear.

EVERYTHING that Christ taught His apostles comprises these Church doctrines which predate the written New Testament scriptures. --Otherwise, Jesus Christ lied when he promised the infant Church the Advocate, His Spirit of Truth (John 16, :7 to :14). The truth subsequently found its way into writing and we had a Holy Bible. It was in fact produced BY the Church, and without her nothing could be pronounced inspired. -- You continued:

''My point in this arguement was that regardless of our opinions, etc.- The Bible teaches that God's truths are absolute and universal. They do not change with circumstances, societal belief, nor time.'' But the Mosaic Law has been fulfilled in Christ, according to Saint Paul. We have the New Covenant, and it carries out our salvation not by observing Deuteronomy to the letter but by grace from Christ on Calvary. When you say God's ''truths'' don't change ever; be sure you distinguish his truths from His commandments to the chosen people. They were under the Law. Many truths are of course unchanging, since they are set forever in the natural law and in the Lord's Ten Commandments. But a statute in itself cannot be called irreversible. As, for instance, circumcision, dietary prohibitions, animal sacrifices, etc. They weren't ''truth'', but the Law of Moses.

Furthermore, it's not the Bible that teaches, but the Church. We know this from Pentecost at the birth of the Catholic faith: Chapter 2 of the Acts of the apostles, from start to end of the chapter. This took place without any written New Testament; the Holy Spirit in action as He will be to the end of the world.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), January 02, 2005.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ