Sometimes I think I'm hearing the voice of my dear departed mother, Louise, and that day she was coming in loud and clear. As I gazed upon the tattoos, I heard her saying, "Well, isn't that just lovely and feminine!" My mother would rather have stood on her head on the altar than sport a tattoo.
Times have changed. An Episcopal priest friend of mine has quite a number of tattoos. On one arm he sports the name of each of his children. He has Christian symbols inked on his chest and neck. He has urged me to get tattooed as well. Louise's voice still plays too loud in my head for that. Even if it didn't, I would have to give the matter serious thought, because traditionally Christians have eschewed tattoos, citing Leviticus 19:28: "You shall not make any gashes in your flesh for the dead or tattoo any marks upon you: I am the Lord."
Today, many Christians dismiss a literal interpretation of that verse, saying that its injunction is bound to the distant past. They are adapting the symbols of contemporary culture to express their faith on their bodies. "What's the harm?" these Christians would ask, and I am inclined to agree.
But we are still left with the question of why the Book of Leviticus denounced tattoos, and what God may have intended by those words, and what those words mean for us today. Scholars say that Leviticus 19:28 was one in a series of commands intended to distinguish the Jewish people from pagans. Both cutting one's flesh as a mourning rite and tattooing the skin were pagan practices and thus forbidden for God's holy people.
Does the same concern hold true today? Is tattooing still a practice that is per se pagan, or opposed to Christianity? I'm not going to lose any sleep over whether my Christian friends have tattoos, nor would I condemn anyone who has them. (I also recognize that my own early enculturation makes the question of having tattoos a moot one for me.)
But with the incredible surge in popularity of tattoos, I have to wonder if we Christians are once again falling prey to powerful marketing messages and celebrity trends instead of listening for God's guidance, unpopular as it may be.
Christians with tattoos often say that their ink is profoundly meaningful, a truly personal and individualistic way of expressing their faith. Once we're committed to Christ, though, we no longer belong to ourselves alone; we were bought at a price.
The pleasures of self-expression must be secondary to the demands of faith. We must consider every decision about the disposition of our bodies in the light of our faith, not the light of contemporary culture. We must also consider how we're spending the money God sees fit to bless us with, and whether spending money on a tattoo is the best financial expression of our values.
When Christians appropriate the habits or symbols of non-Christian culture, we can transform them - or they can transform us. Each Christian must determine for himself or herself if "skin art" is acceptable. It's just one of many aspects of modern life that merit the question, "Is this in line with God's desires for me?"
After all, it's the inclination of our hearts, not the state of our skin, that God's most interested in.
---
* CONNIE CLARK, an Episcopal priest and chaplain in Evanston, Wyo., welcomes comments at chaplconnie@yahoo.com. You may also comment by e-mailing religioneditor@sltrib.com.
