Icon Tattoo

[the_Abbot]

Is it wrong to have an icon tattood on yourself?

 

[xenia]

Are you prepared to have it venerated?

 

[Chocolatesa]

Are you prepared to have it venerated?

LOL!

 

[the_Abbot]

LOL

I guess I would feel awkward if someone comes up to my tattoo and venerates the tattoo.

Actually the reason I asked was because someone I was talking to (non Orthodox Christian) wants to get an icon tattood on him.

 

[KatyaMartinka]

hmm.... why would a non-Orthodox want an icon tattoo?

 

[Akathist]

I don't think it is wrong for a nonEO to get an image of an "icon" on them because they don't venerate them anyway. I wouldn't call it an icon however. I would call it a "tat".

Personally, I hate needles so I am tattooless.

 

[the_Abbot]

hmm.... why would a non-Orthodox want an icon tattoo?

It was an icon of Jesus that I showed him and he wanted a tattoo of Jesus and wanted to use the image of Jesus in the icon.

 

[KatyaMartinka]

I don't think it is wrong for a nonEO to get an image of an "icon" on them because they don't venerate them anyway. I wouldn't call it an icon however. I would call it a "tat".

Personally, I hate needles so I am tattooless.

yeah, I see your point.
I hate needles, as well, but i've been told that it's TOTALLY different with tattoo needles. I want one or two, it's just a matter of money.

It was an icon of Jesus that I showed him and he wanted a tattoo of Jesus and wanted to use the image of Jesus in the icon.

oh ok, makes sense then.

 

[Kristos]

Would he have to sit in the church for 40 days to get it blessed?

 

[Michael G]

It is wrong for any number of reasons. First tatoos are wrong because they are marking the body, and the OT makes it clear that is wrong. Second, icons are to be venerated and I doubt you want to have your body venerated and even if you did want to have your body venerated that would be sacrilege. Third, icons are to be put on a permanent surface and your skin is not considered to be a permanent surface. Fourth, if you get the body part you have the icon tatooed on dirty or injured in any way you are injuring an icon and that is sacrilege. I can go on and on, but I think you get my point.

 

[Michael G]

Fr. Vasily would say "IS OUTRAGE!!!" Or more like "IS SACRILEGE!!!"

 

[KatyaMartinka]

since WHEN are tattoos wrong? the only thing the OT says about it is "do not mark your bodies IN REMEMBRANCE OF THE DEAD as the pagans do..."
I know plenty of Christians, Orthodox and non-Orthodox, who have tattoos, and there is plenty of history to back up Orthodox Christians getting/wearing/displaying tattoos, although they are mostly crosses, if I am not mistaken...

 

[Orthosdoxa]

I think that's creepy. I wouldn't do it and I would at least gently suggest to my friend that they get Kermit the Frog instead or something.

 

[Nickolai]

Tattoos are greatly frowned on in Orthodoxy. I know of several Bishops who didn't ordain some people because of Tats.

There is the scriptural mandate no to do it. It is a form of mutilation. Which has several canons condemnations. If you're Orthodox, You shouldn't do it.

the only case where Orthodox Christians do it is in the case of some Oriental Orthodox who did it as a sign that they didn't fear martyrdom.

 

[JuvenalyMartinka]

the only case where Orthodox Christians do it is in the case of some Oriental Orthodox who did it as a sign that they didn't fear martyrdom.

I think you are a bit mistake here. It was not done as a sign for those who do not fear martyrdom, it is a definite outward sign of one's faith in Christ. Therefore, while I can not agree with necessarily having a tattoo of an icon put on one's body, I would be more apt to accept a tattoo of a cross. Whether it is on the wrists or somewhere else, as long as it is done for the right reasons then I see no issue with it.

I would also like the names of the bishops that you have said would not ordain a man with tattoos. I would like to call them and ask them for their reasons. I am so tired of people using the phrase "There is a biblical mandate not to do this" (end of conversation). Ok, that's great, do you want me to go through the entire Bible and GUESS at which of the million or so verses you are talking of? Please consider sharing your biblical knowledge for those of us that just might be interested in exactly what the heck you are talking about.

 

[Nickolai]

I think you are a bit mistake here. It was not done as a sign for those who do not fear martyrdom, it is a definite outward sign of one's faith in Christ. Therefore, while I can not agree with necessarily having a tattoo of an icon put on one's body, I would be more apt to accept a tattoo of a cross. Whether it is on the wrists or somewhere else, as long as it is done for the right reasons then I see no issue with it.

I'm afraid you are mistaken here. In places like Egypt, the culture is predominantly Muslim. The Copts specifically wear tattoos of crosses either in the wrist or forehead as a sign of defiance, and that they don't fear martyrdom. Which is as you said an outward sign of faith in Christ. But it's done in defiance, not for fashion. And even then I'm not sure it's completely justified.

I would also like the names of the bishops that you have said would not ordain a man with tattoos. I would like to call them and ask them for their reasons.

Well, Metropolitan HERMAN is one of them. But why does it matter? You are not a Bishop, right? Are you smarter than one? Are you seminary trained? What authority do you have as a newly illumined to say a Bishop is wrong?

I am so tired of people using the phrase "There is a biblical mandate not to do this" (end of conversation). Ok, that's great, do you want me to go through the entire Bible and GUESS at which of the million or so verses you are talking of? Please consider sharing your biblical knowledge for those of us that just might be interested in exactly what the heck you are talking about.

Well, the verse in Leviticus is the one most cited, but it specifically in reference to a pagan practice. The Main problem with tattoos though is (as I already said) it is a mutilation of the body. St. Paul tells us in the 1st Epistle to the Corinthians that "our body is a Temple" and not ours. Do you go around hanging paintings in houses of other people? No you don't, so why do it to your body, which belongs to the Lord?

Not to mention the Canons written by the Church which speak out strongly against mutilation, and are the reasons why bishops sometimes don't ordain tatted people.

CANON XXII

Let no one who has mutilated himself become a clergyman; for he is a murderer of himself, and an enemy of God’s creation

Canon XXIII.

If any man being a clergyman shall mutilate himself, let him be deposed, for he is a self-murderer.

Canon XXIV.

If a layman mutilate himself, let him be excommunicated for three years, as practising against his own life.

I'm sure there are more, but my access to the Rudder is gone for the evening and I don't feel like walking to the library for something like that.

In the end though. If you have a Tat from your pre-Orthodox life, there's not much you can do about it. And most Bishops will actually overlook it in that case. The ones that were refused were guys that got them after Baptism/Chrismation.

 

[Tsarina]

I've asked a Priest about this, and he said it is wrong for an Orthodox Christian to get tats, according to the Cannons. Also, he told me that many Bishops don't even ordain men to the Priesthood if they have a tat.

 

[Akathist]

I have heard the same thing about those the church's position on tatoos. I also consider it a mutilation of the body.

I just don't think there is anything wrong with an nonEO getting a tattoo of an image of Christ. It would of course not be an icon though. It would just be an image taken from an icon.

If I sent you a greeting card with the image of the Nativity Icon on it, does that mean you have to venerate the card? No. (But you could if you wanted to). Because it is a greeting card I don't hesitate to send it to nonEO family members as I don't fear them mistreating an icon. It is just a card.

The tattoo wouldn't be an icon. Do I think it is mutilation to get tattoos?... yes. But I wouldn't put that standard on anyone outside the Church.

 

[the_Abbot]

I just found some information about Orthodox and tattoos from the OCA website.

http://www.oca.org/QA.asp?ID=71&SID=3

 

[Nichole]

What about those that had tatoos before they even knew about Orthodoxy/became Orthodox? What do they do now? Are they condemned because of some stupid past mistake?