Dear Kelly:

I have taken some time before responding because I get so upset when I hear about priests saying such stupid things.

If the priest thinks that my quotes from the Church are "outdated" then it is his duty and responsibility to provide the proof of that. When did the Church update its teaching and where are the documents to prove it?

If he is unwilling or unable to produce such documents, then he is just blowing steam out the side of his mouth with no integrity or respect for the truth. This is a typical mark of a liberal.

If he is not going to exercise the caution instructed by the Church, I am reminded of a comment made by St. Teresa of Avila"

"The more we see failure in obedience, the stronger should be our suspicion of temptation."

The Church is open to "scientific" investigation of hypnosis. As I mentioned in the last post, hypnosis may be useful in a certain clinical settings.

Entertainment hypnosis has no value. Even if there were no spiritual or psychological dangers to hypnosis (and there are such dangers; I have personally seen it and have personally harmed someone when doing "entertainment hypnosis), entertainment hypnosis would still be immoral.

To demonstrate the effects of hypnosis one can do the standard feats of sticking a pin into a person and the person does not flinch; or having the person hold out there arm and no matter how hard the hypnotist tries to lower the arm, the person's arm is rock solid in its position.

Entertainment hypnotist may do these things, but they do not stop there because these sorts of demonstrations are boring after a few minutes. More showbiz is required to make the audience happy.

Then comes the immoral part. The hypnotist will give the volunteers hypnotic suggestions for them to perform for the audience in some humiliating way (e.g., prancing around like a chicken). The audience laughs.

This is a violation of the person's human dignity. Even if the volunteer does not care, it is still not acceptable, as it is still an act of degrading the human person and is uncharitable for the sake of "the show", for entertainment. Even if the volunteers do not care, part of the humor comes from the notion that the person is being forced or tricked to perform in humiliating ways in which they would never do otherwise. The audience laughing at someone else's humiliation is patently uncharitable.

This is not much different than getting someone drunk or high on drugs to encourage them to walk around with a lampshade on their head. Again, this humiliating behavior is not something the person would normally do except "under the influence." People laughing at the drunk person humiliating himself is equally as uncharitable and immoral.

Why does our society think that it is funny to see others humiliate and make fools of themselves because of intoxication or hypnosis, or other manipulative techniques?

This is also the reason why the comedian Don Rickles (the insult comic) is so problematic. He has made a living and a career out of put-down humor and humiliating others for the sake of a laugh.

It may well be funny and the victims of Rickles' humor may be "good sports", but it does not remove the fact that we are laughing at others' humiliation.

The world may find all that funny and acceptable, but we are not the world. As Christians we are to be counter-cultural. It sounds like your priest has forgotten that.

I certainly have no respect for anyone who thinks humiliating others is entertainment, even if it is "justa joke" (a phrase that comes from the philosophy of the devil to excuse ungodly behavior).

Shame on him.

God Bless,
Bro. Ignatius Mary