In 787 the Second Council of Nicea banned all tattoos as a “pagan practice.” https://earlychurchhistory.org/daily-life/tattoos-in-the-ancient-world/
Can somebody confirm that? Does that mean no tattoo is allowed at all?
What about piercings? I feel like nose rings that look like cow's nose rings are a big no-no but a thin small ring on one nostril doesn't look that bad (although I still would prefer that people not do that). Would you say even that should be forbidden?
Were they simply banned, or were they said to be evil in themselves?
I have a hard time understanding how any body modification (unless it would be something that would quickly heal over if not caused to do otherwise, such as an ear piercing, or any other kind of piercing for that matter, that has had the stud removed long enough to close up) can be acceptable. However, if the Church has never condemned such modifications as
malum in se, I cannot either.
The bizarre piercings we have nowadays, such as those to accommodate nose rings (really?), would then seem then to be more contrary to modesty (and, if I can say this, human dignity), than problematical because they are temporary mutilations of the body.
But tattoos are not temporary (unless one wanted to be really jesuitical, and say "well, they're temporary, because you will eventually die and decompose, and so will the tattoo"). Again, if the Church doesn't condemn them as
per se sinful, then neither can I, but I still don't get it.
People have gone absolutely nuts in recent years. And the teenager or twenty-something who simply has to have all of those tattoos right now, needs to think what those tattoos are going to look like 40 years from now. They'll pretty much just be big ugly blobs. What's good about that? (And tattoos are far more problematical to remove, than they are to get.)
I've never had a tattoo or any other form of body modification, and I don't intend to.