Tattoos....

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='goldenchild17' post='1482947' date='Mar 24 2008, 01:50 AM']If you're asking did they? Then no.

If you're asking would they? Then who knows? Did Christ do every single thing on this planet that is to be considered acceptable for us? Of course not. If this was the case then no one should play an instrument of any kind. That's just one example, but there are many quite acceptable things that we have no record of Christ doing I'm quite sure. We should ultimately strive to be perfect. But in doing this we must abstain from all things that the Church teaches to be wrong and to do as many things as the Church teaches to be good. Christ had long flowing hair and a beard, and walked around in robes. Should we do that as well?[/quote]

It would seem to be violation of conscience, faith and reason to state yes, Christ would disfigure or alter his already perfect body for a tattoo. But it would not seem to be a violation of conscience, faith and reason to state yes, Christ would play a flute or trumpet. After all he did sing. No, it is a not violation of conscience, faith and reason to have short hair, and not have a beard.

We are to be holy as Christ is holy. God created our bodies with a dignity and beauty, it seems vanity to say we could add to that beauty. Yet, if we can honestly say with in ourselves without violating conscience, faith and reason that Christ would get similar tattoo for the same reason we want that tattoo, then so be it. But if the answer is no, then defiantly not.

[indent] 1. "You shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead, nor tattoo any marks on you: I am the Lord" (Leviticus 19:28)

2. "Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled." (Matthew 5:17-18)

3. "Do you not know that you are the temple of God and that the Spirit of God dwells in you?" (1 Corinthians 3:16)

4. "Or do you not know that your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from God, and you are not your own? For you were bought at a price; therefore glorify God in your body and in your spirit, which are God's." (1 Corinthians 6:19)

5. "If anyone defiles the temple of God, God will destroy him. For the temple of God is holy, which temple you are." (1 Corinthians 3:17)[/indent]

P.S. I couldnt sleep... mine sister woke me with bad news.... pray for us.

Edited March 24, 2008 by KnightofChrist

[KnightofChrist]

I would also state that if we dont know what Christ would do then it is better and wiser not to get a tattoo.

I will give an exaggerate example. I use "you" as a gerenal term, not directed to any one person. Say you and a friend are hunting, you think your friend is in another part of the wood, you see something move behind some bushes, you dont know what it is, do you shoot? Lets say you shoot anyway, and lucky for you it was a deer. Even so did not some type of violation take place? Yes.

Edited March 24, 2008 by KnightofChrist

[goldenchild17]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' post='1482951' date='Mar 24 2008, 02:43 AM']It would seem to be violation of conscience, faith and reason to state yes, Christ would disfigure or alter his already perfect body for a tattoo. But it would not seem to be a violation of conscience, faith and reason to state yes, Christ would play a flute or trumpet. After all he did sing. No, it is a not violation of conscience, faith and reason to have short hair, and not have a beard.[/quote]

Whether Christ did or would do it isn't perfectly relevant. Yes we want to follow His example as far as possible. Yet He (which eventually instituting Christianity) still followed many Old Testament Jewish customs. One of these was to not be tattooed. That is not in force any more. So it is irrelevant.

[quote]We are to be holy as Christ is holy.[/quote]

agreed. And our means to holiness is the sacraments, and also obedience to the Church. Christ set the most perfect example of obedience by following Old Testament customs. We are to follow New Testament customs. Those things from the Old Testament that are not expressly commanded or forbade in Christianity (as opposed to Old Testament Judaism) are not applicable. Tattooing is not addressed as required or forbidden in the New Testament Covenant.

[quote]If we can honestly say with in ourselves without violating conscience, faith and reason that Christ would get smilier tattoo for the same reason we want that tattoo, then so be it. But if the answer is no, then defiantly no.[/quote]

See above. He wouldn't do so regardless because it was against Jewish custom. If he were here today I wouldn't dare say one way or the other what God's thinking would be in regards to why or why not get a tattoo. All I have to go by is Christ's example of obedience. He followed Old Covenant customs. I follow New Testament customs. What's more? Christ Himself instituted the New Covenant and was (along with the Father and Holy Ghost) the principle author of the New Covenant and all that was and was not allowed. Tattooing is not forbidden.

[quote][indent] 1. "You shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead, nor tattoo any marks on you: I am the Lord" (Leviticus 19:28)[/quote]

Old Covenant.

[quote]2. "Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled." (Matthew 5:17-18)[/quote]

Okay, so then you are to hold all that is required by the Old Covenant? Fair enough. If you want we can go through each of the Old Testament laws and see if Catholics today hold to them. I think you would have to agree that they don't. Are they not saved?

Regardless:

Hebrews 8:6-13
"6 But now he hath obtained a [b]better[/b] ministry, by how much also he is a mediator of a [b]better[/b] testament, which is established on better promises. 7 [b]For if that former had been faultless, there should not indeed a place have been sought for a second.[/b] 8 For finding fault with them, he saith: Behold, the days shall come, saith the Lord: and I will perfect unto the house of Israel, and unto the house of Juda, a new testament: 9 Not according to the testament which I made to their fathers, on the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt: because they continued not in my testament: and I regarded them not, saith the Lord. 10 For this is the testament which I will make to the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord: I will give my laws into their mind, and in their heart will I write them: and I will be their God, and they shall be my people:

11 And they shall not teach every man his neighbour and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me from the least to the greatest of them: 12 Because I will be merciful to their iniquities, and their sins I will remember no more. 13 Now in saying a new, he hath made the former old. And that which decayeth and groweth old, is near its end. "



Verse 7 is particularly nice. The Old Testament was not perfect. So now, if Christ came to change, quite obviously it didn't not stay the same. He certainly did not abolish it completely. A good number of Old Testament practices and decrees are declared by the New Covenant Church (i.e. Catholicism) to be still in effect. The Ten Commandments might be a good example. But there is obviously many rules that no longer apply and this is because either the Church has declared them no longer in force, or else they are not mentioned at all (i.e. tattooing).

[quote]3. "Do you not know that you are the temple of God and that the Spirit of God dwells in you?" (1 Corinthians 3:16)
4. "Or do you not know that your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from God, and you are not your own? For you were bought at a price; therefore glorify God in your body and in your spirit, which are God's." (1 Corinthians 6:19)
5. "If anyone defiles the temple of God, God will destroy him. For the temple of God is holy, which temple you are." (1 Corinthians 3:17)[/indent][/quote]
One of my favorite verses. Doesn't apply in this situation however, as far as I can see.

[goldenchild17]

I would say that care must be taken in all cases when considering a tattoo. Which is why I think location is particularly important, or what you wear in the company of those who might be offended by tattoos:

"But take heed lest perhaps this your liberty become a stumblingblock to the weak." 1 Cor. 8:9

[goldenchild17]

Look at your verse "against tattoos" in context. In fact, just look at the very previous verse. Leviticus 19:27 - "Nor shall you cut your hair roundwise: nor shave your beard."

I suppose you never shave or cut your hair short? Maybe you don't, but do you do it for religious purposes? I have a beard and am growing my hair, but only because I feel like it. Are those who don't going against Catholic teaching? I would think not.

[Archaeology cat]

[quote name='goldenchild17' post='1482944' date='Mar 24 2008, 06:44 AM']Done in Bali and Bangkok, not all henna tats in general. Overgeneralization if this is an argument against all tattoos.
This I've heard of on occasion. I don't know everything about henna, maybe its not a proper agent to use. I've known people with henna tattoos who have had no side effects, so its an overgeneralization to use this and say that tattoos are wrong.[/quote]
A good henna tattooist will do a small test spot to see if you react to it if you ask. I have really sensitive skin, so that's what I did to be sure I wouldn't have an adverse reaction if I got a larger henna tattoo.


[quote name='KnightofChrist' post='1482951' date='Mar 24 2008, 07:43 AM']P.S. I couldnt sleep... mine sister woke me with bad news.... pray for us.[/quote]

[abercius24]

The Church's position on tattoos is that you not overuse them to the point that they begin to abuse your body, or have a tattoo that is inappropriate in content. That's more along the lines of the Church's teachings against obsessive behavior and common decency, though, not really tattoos in general.

I personally see an inspiring use for tattoos to commemorate a very personal event, such as a war service tattoo, or a father who has a tattoo to represent the birth of each of his children. In my opinion, its not reasonable to have anything else. Given that you will someday be and old man/woman with a tattoo, or two, or a lot -- you should have a good explanation as to why you have it. Tattoos can be somewhat attractive on young people, but they are less than attractive on older, wrinkled people.

[goldenchild17]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' post='1482951' date='Mar 24 2008, 02:43 AM']P.S. I couldnt sleep... mine sister woke me with bad news.... pray for us.[/quote]

for sure. peace

[goldenchild17]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' post='1482953' date='Mar 24 2008, 03:03 AM']I would also state that if we dont know what Christ would do then it is better and wiser not to get a tattoo.

I will give an exaggerate example. I use "you" as a gerenal term, not directed to any one person. Say you and a friend are hunting, you think your friend is in another part of the wood, you see something move behind some bushes, you dont know what it is, do you shoot? Lets say you shoot anyway, and lucky for you it was a deer. Even so did not some type of violation take place? Yes.[/quote]

It would be wrong because there is a chance the friend is there. What do we have to go by that tattoos are wrong? If there was some indication that they were wrong then I would say yes stay away even just to be careful, but there is no such guidance given. The Old Testament prohibition, if I remember right, of tattoos was because of their connection to pagan rituals. Obviously that cannot be the case any more (even if some people do get them for this reason) because other things which are now allowed (easter eggs, Christmas holiday etc.) was connected to Pagan holidays/rituals.

[goldenchild17]

[quote name='Archaeology cat' post='1482957' date='Mar 24 2008, 03:35 AM']A good henna tattooist will do a small test spot to see if you react to it if you ask. I have really sensitive skin, so that's what I did to be sure I wouldn't have an adverse reaction if I got a larger henna tattoo.[/quote]
I figured any tattoo artist on the up and up would do that. I might get a henna one to see how I like them. We'll see...

[Archaeology cat]

[quote name='goldenchild17' post='1482963' date='Mar 24 2008, 09:18 AM']I figured any tattoo artist on the up and up would do that. I might get a henna one to see how I like them. We'll see...[/quote]
True. I like henna tattoos. In part because I cant think of anything I'd want permanently.

[Lil Red]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' post='1482931' date='Mar 23 2008, 10:47 PM']Should we not strive to be like them, to be [s][color="#FF0000"]prefect[/color][/s]?[/quote]
[quote name='KnightofChrist' post='1482940' date='Mar 23 2008, 11:36 PM']They were [s][color="#FF0000"]prefect[/color][/s], would they have tattoos?[/quote]

[b][color="#0000FF"]perfect[/b][/color]

[Lil Red]

golden, nice send up on the posted article.

[knightec]

[img]http://a152.ac-images.myspacecdn.com/images01/1/m_2cb424614b16b2c07c65beda8d5944e7.jpg[/img]


This is my tattoo. I got the cross to commemorate my confirmation and I got my wife's name done to celebrate our 10th anniversary. I'm also working on an cross, anchor, and a heart (symbols of faith, hope, and love) for my other arm. I don't see tattoos as mutilating the body because I do worse stuff to my body by eating fast food a couple times a week.

[KnightofChrist]

Whether Christ would now or then submit to or refuse a tattoo is perfectly relevant to us. Christ is the New Testament, then, now, forever. He followed the perfection of the law, and taught against its imperfection. He taught against divorce, healed on the Sabbath day, taught against and did not allow stoning. Because Christ choose to follow the law against tattoos, is a very good reason we should also. Unless it is shown that the New Testament does away with a law Christ followed. But there is no proof that the law against tattoos was done away with, in fact though there will be disagreement it would seem to be reinforced. Matthew 5:17-18, 1 Corinthians 3:16, 1 Corinthians 6:19, 1 Corinthians 3:17, and etc...

If we are to look at Leviticus 19:27, we should also look at Leviticus 19:29 which succeeds Leviticus 19:28. Leviticus 19:29 "You shall not degrade your daughter by making a prostitute of her; else the land will become corrupt and full of lewdness. This is the only verse in the whole of the Holy Scriptures, Old and New, in which, God directly forbids the selling of ones daughter for prostitution. Is this also irrelevant now? No, because it dishonors the body the Holy Temple of the Spirit.

Or what of Leviticus 18:21 "You shall not offer any of your offspring to be immolated to Molech, thus profaning the name of your God. I am the LORD." This also seems to be the only place in which the Holy Scriptures, Old and New, forbid the human sacrifice of children. This is not forbidden in the New Testament Covenant. But it is clearly forbidden.

And what of, Leviticus 18:23 "You shall not have carnal relations with an animal, defiling yourself with it; nor shall a woman set herself in front of an animal to mate with it; such things are abhorrent." This is the only place through out the Holy Scriptures, Old and New, where God directly forbids bestiality. It is not forbidden in the New Testament Covenant. Is this also irrelevant now? No, because it dishonors the body the Holy Temple of the Spirit.

Clearly much of the Old law now applies to us, via Moral and Natural Law. Leviticus 19:28, like Matthew 5:17-18, 1 Corinthians 3:16, 1 Corinthians 6:19, 1 Corinthians 3:17, calls for the proper reverence of God's creation, and the the Holy Temple of the Holy Spirit. The Fifth Commandment forbids unnecessary harm to the body. Tattooing is an unnecessary risk to the body as well as an unnecessary alteration of the body. Clearly tattooing is a unnecessary, and unnatural alteration of the body, that does cause harm to the body, or blood would not be drawn. Tattoos are very fancy self-inflected scars, covered by ink which is unnaturally injected into the body.

Catholics thinking of getting a tattoo should ask themselves would Christ or our Blessed Mother receive a tattoo? Since we should strive to be like them, and not do something that would not do. If Christ would now or then forbid to have a tattoo, we should also, the same would be true for Mary. Who can honestly say without violating faith and reason, that Christ or Mary would allow there bodies to be disfigured or altered by an unnecessary unnatural ink injected scar.

We should always strive to do and follow what Christ and Mary would do and follow, because there is honor and reward in that. But we endanger ourselves when we do and follow things that Christ and Mary would avoid and not do or follow. If a Catholic could honestly say without violating faith and reason, that Christ or Mary would submit to a tattoo, good for you. But I would disagree I do not believe, nor do I think most Catholic would believe Christ or Mary would allow there bodies to be disfigured or altered by a tattoo. But I would say again, keeping in mind would do good to follow what Christ follows, and not follow what Christ would not follow, if one can not answer, it would be better to avoid getting tattoo. Because after all Christ may well say at the end it is a blemish on the temple of God.

Edited March 25, 2008 by KnightofChrist