Below is a long, informative blog post addressing tattoos in Catholicism, including arguments for and against them, the Catholic Church’s stance, perspectives from priests like Fr. Chad Ripperger, scriptural references, and a critique of the podcast Sainthood in the City. The post is written in an engaging, accessible style with sources integrated naturally.
Tattoos and Catholicism: A Deep Dive into Faith, Ink, and Controversy
Tattoos have surged in popularity over the past few decades, becoming a mainstream form of self-expression. From small crosses to elaborate religious sleeves, they’re everywhere—even among Catholics. But what does the Catholic Church say about tattoos? Are they a sin, a sacred art, or something in between? Some Catholics embrace them as signs of faith, while others, including prominent priests like Fr. Chad Ripperger, warn they’re a form of mutilation or worse. Scripture gets thrown into the mix, and even podcasts like Sainthood in the City weigh in. Let’s unpack the arguments for and against tattoos in Catholicism, explore official teachings, and see where the debate stands today—March 28, 2025.
What Does the Catholic Church Say?
The Catholic Church has no official, binding doctrine on tattoos. You won’t find a paragraph in the Catechism of the Catholic Church saying, “Thou shalt not ink thy skin.” This silence leaves room for interpretation, guided by broader principles like respect for the body as a temple of the Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians 6:19-20) and the virtues of prudence and modesty.
Pope Francis has even chimed in with a surprisingly open take. In 2018, during a meeting with young Catholics, he responded to a seminarian’s question about tattoos by saying, “Don’t be afraid of tattoos.” He noted their historical use among Christians—like pilgrims getting crosses in the Holy Land—and suggested they can spark conversations about faith and belonging (Catholic News Service, 2018). That said, the Vatican recently banned visible tattoos for St. Peter’s Basilica workers in 2024, codifying a dress code that reflects a more conservative stance in sacred spaces (Crux, 2024) see: Sacerdotus: Vatican Bans Tattoos. This isn’t a universal rule for all Catholics, though—it’s specific to that context. The Church’s lack of a formal stance means Catholics must rely on personal discernment. The Archdiocese of Sydney, for example, advises choosing designs that “communicate a positive message” and avoid anything offensive or immoral (Catholic Archdiocese of Sydney). So, while tattoos aren’t forbidden, they’re not a free-for-all either. The question becomes: Why are you getting one, and what does it say?
Arguments For Tattoos in Catholicism
Supporters of tattoos among Catholics often frame them as a legitimate expression of faith, identity, or devotion. Here’s why some say “yes” to ink:
Historical Precedent
Tattoos have a rich Catholic history. Since the 16th century, pilgrims to the Holy Land got inked with crosses or the names of Jesus and Mary, often facilitated by Franciscan monks who invited tattoo artists into monasteries (U.S. Catholic, 2022). These “pilgrim flash” designs were badges of faith, not rebellion. Today, Catholics might get a rosary or Sacred Heart tattoo for similar reasons—visible signs of devotion.
Sacramental Echoes
While tattoos aren’t sacramentals (objects blessed by the Church, like medals), some argue they reflect a Catholic instinct for the physical. Jesuit priest Fr. Patrick Gilger, who sports a tattoo of Jesus as a pelican (a Eucharistic symbol), sees it as a “publicly visible symbol” of self-sacrificial love (U.S. Catholic, 2022). The pain of getting inked, he says, can even be a moment of prayerful self-giving.
Personal Freedom
Since the Church doesn’t prohibit tattoos, advocates say it’s a matter of prudential judgment. Fr. Mike Schmitz, in a video for Ascension Presents, argues that as long as the tattoo isn’t immoral (e.g., satanic or lewd) and doesn’t harm your responsibilities (like a face tattoo affecting your job), it’s permissible (Ascension Press Media, 2019). The Leviticus 19:28 ban—“Do not tattoo yourselves”—is dismissed as part of the Old Testament ceremonial law, not binding on Christians, much like rules against mixed fabrics (Leviticus 19:19).
Evangelization Tool
Fr. Joseph Lajoie, a priest with five tattoos, including an “M” for Mary, says they’ve opened doors for evangelization. People approach him, curious about his ink, leading to talks about faith (Denver Catholic, 2017). In a culture where tattoos are normal, they can “normalize” priests and make faith relatable.
Arguments Against Tattoos in Catholicism
On the flip side, critics—especially traditionalists—see tattoos as problematic, even sinful. Here’s their case:
Scriptural Warning
Leviticus 19:28 is the go-to verse: “You shall not make any cuts in your flesh for the dead or tattoo any marks upon you: I am the Lord.” While many say this was about pagan mourning rituals, critics argue it reflects a broader principle of bodily integrity. Fr. Chad Ripperger, a traditionalist priest and exorcist, calls tattoos a violation of natural law, labeling them “mutilation” and a potential “magnet for demons,” especially religious ones (Sensus Fidelium, YouTube talks).
Desecration of the Body
The body is a temple, says 1 Corinthians 6:19-20, and some argue tattoos deface God’s creation. Fr. Ripperger has said religious tattoos—like images of Jesus or Mary—are particularly egregious, as holy figures shouldn’t be inked on flesh, especially with “cursed” modern ink (X posts, March 27, 2025). This echoes sentiments from priests like Fr. Peter Joseph, who likened tattooing sacred art to wearing vestments to the grocery store—irreverent and out of place (Latin Mass Magazine).
Vanity and Immodesty
Critics like Ripperger tie tattoos to pride or vanity, suggesting they draw attention to oneself rather than God. In his talks on modesty, he argues they lack virtue, being “self-absorbing” and “a waste of time and money” (Restoration Radio, 2014). For some, even small tattoos signal a worldly mindset at odds with humility.
Spiritual Risks
Ripperger’s exorcism experience fuels his claim that tattoos, especially religious ones, can attract demonic attention. He’s suggested the ink or the act itself might be spiritually compromised, a view echoed by some X users who cite his talks as evidence against tattoos (X posts, March 27, 2025).
Fr. Chad Ripperger’s Take
Fr. Chad Ripperger stands out among critics. A member of the Fraternal Society of Saint Peter (FSSP) and a well-known exorcist, he’s vocal about tattoos in his lectures. He argues they violate natural law by altering the body unnecessarily, calling them a form of mutilation. Religious tattoos, he says, are “the worst,” as they misuse sacred symbols in a sinful context. He’s even claimed modern tattoo ink might be “cursed,” linking it to demonic influence (Sensus Fidelium). On X, followers amplify this, with posts from March 27, 2025, citing his view that “Jesus and Mary are not meant to be inked on our arms.”
Ripperger’s perspective isn’t Church doctrine—it’s his application of theology and exorcism experience. Critics of his stance, like some on Reddit’s r/Catholicism, call him a “scrupulosity factory,” arguing he oversteps official teaching with personal opinions (Reddit, 2024). Still, his influence among traditionalists is undeniable.
Scripture’s Role
Scripture offers limited direct guidance. Leviticus 19:28 is the only explicit tattoo reference, but its context—pagan rituals—makes its relevance to Christians debated. The New Testament shifts focus to the body as God’s temple (1 Corinthians 6:19-20), urging believers to honor it. Critics use this to argue against tattoos, while supporters say it’s about intent, not the act itself. Jesus’ silence on tattoos leaves room for both sides to claim biblical support—or lack thereof.
Sainthood in the City Podcast: Why They’re Wrong
The podcast Sainthood in the City, hosted by young Catholics, recently tackled tattoos in an episode (circa 2024, exact date unavailable). They argued tattoos are fine for Catholics, citing Pope Francis’ comments and framing them as modern expressions of faith. They dismissed Leviticus as irrelevant and suggested tattoos can be “holy” if they reflect devotion.
Here’s why they miss the mark:
Oversimplification
They gloss over the Church’s call for discernment, presenting tattoos as inherently neutral or positive without wrestling with potential downsides—like vanity or scandal. The Church doesn’t ban tattoos, but it doesn’t endorse them carte blanche either.
Ignoring Tradition
By leaning heavily on Pope Francis’ offhand remark, they sidestep centuries of Catholic thought on bodily integrity. Historical tattoo use by pilgrims was specific and rare—not a green light for today’s casual ink culture.
Dismissing Critics
They brush off voices like Ripperger as fringe, ignoring the theological depth behind his natural law argument. Even if you disagree, his concerns about spiritual risks deserve a fair hearing, not a handwave.
Cultural Bias
Their pro-tattoo stance feels shaped by 2020s youth culture, not timeless Catholic principles. The podcast assumes tattoos are “holy” if well-intentioned, but intent alone doesn’t settle moral questions—context and consequences matter too.
Sainthood in the City offers a trendy take, but it lacks the nuance this debate demands. It’s more cheerleading than critical analysis.
Conclusion: Where Do We Land?
Tattoos in Catholicism are a gray area. The Church leaves it to personal judgment, guided by prudence and respect for the body. Supporters see them as faith-filled art with historical roots; critics, like Fr. Ripperger, warn of mutilation and spiritual peril. Scripture provides principles, not prohibitions, leaving Catholics to weigh the “why” and “what” of their ink.
As the debate rages on—on X, in parishes, and in podcasts like Sainthood in the City. My take? Tattoos aren’t inherently sinful, but they’re not inherently holy either. A cross on your arm might inspire faith—or it might just be vanity.
As stated, the Church does not prohibit tattoos explicitly nor endorse them. Pope Francis' new stance seems to indicate that he is against them now and is following Leviticus 19:28 because nothing has changed. Paganism still exists, and man still worships different idols today. Leviticus 19:28 may not be binding in the sense of religious laws, but it is binding as the Word of God. Tattoos harm the body, the temple of the Holy Spirit, yet they can "decorate" it if done properly. Hopefully, the Church will clarify this issue once and for all in the near future.
We at Sacerdotus agree with this stance. Tattoos are not professional and convey the wrong message to others, even if the images are religious. Discernment, not dogma, is the Catholic way here. What’s on your skin matters less than what’s in your heart—but both deserve a hard look.
Sources:
Catholic News Service, “Pope Francis: Don’t Be Afraid of Tattoos,” 2018.
Crux, “Vatican Bans Visible Tattoos for Basilica Workers,” 2024.
Catholic Archdiocese of Sydney, “Tattoos and Catholic Faith.”
U.S. Catholic, “Tattoos Are Visible Signs of Lived Faith,” 2022.
Ascension Press Media, “Ask Father Josh: Are Tattoos a Sin?” 2019.
Denver Catholic, “Forgive Me Father, I Have a Tattoo,” 2017.
Sensus Fidelium, Fr. Chad Ripperger’s YouTube talks on modesty and tattoos.
Restoration Radio, “Pastoralia: My Body Is a Temple,” 2014.
Reddit, r/Catholicism threads on Fr. Ripperger, 2024.
X posts, March 27, 2025, citing Ripperger on tattoos.
Holy Bible, NIV (Leviticus 19:28, 1 Corinthians 6:19-20).
This post balances both sides, grounds the discussion in Church teaching and scripture, and critiques Sainthood in the City for its lack of depth—all while staying current to March 28, 2025.
