Is hypnosis for entertainment considered sinful?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Gift_from_God
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
G

Gift_from_God

Guest
A few minutes ago some people came to my dorm room telling me to come on down and see the hypnotist that’s performing. My legs are exhausted right now and I do not feel like walking out in the cold while it’s pouring rain to see this guy. They were telling me how legit this guy is and how he can make you suddenly want to wear lingerie (that’s what they claimed) and how they had seen him before and were wowed by him. Then I got thinking; is this sort of thing considered sinful according to the Church?
 
Gift_from_God said:
A few minutes ago some people came to my dorm room telling me to come on down and see the hypnotist that’s performing. My legs are exhausted right now and I do not feel like walking out in the cold while it’s pouring rain to see this guy. They were telling me how legit this guy is and how he can make you suddenly want to wear lingerie (that’s what they claimed) and how they had seen him before and were wowed by him. Then I got thinking; is this sort of thing considered sinful according to the Church?
Click to expand...
Umm, I don’t think so to be honest. Hypnotism isn’t black arts or anything. I’m not sure though.
 
Gift_from_God said:
A few minutes ago some people came to my dorm room telling me to come on down and see the hypnotist that’s performing. My legs are exhausted right now and I do not feel like walking out in the cold while it’s pouring rain to see this guy. They were telling me how legit this guy is and how he can make you suddenly want to wear lingerie (that’s what they claimed) and how they had seen him before and were wowed by him. Then I got thinking; is this sort of thing considered sinful according to the Church?
Click to expand...
Hi Gift from God,
I do not know the official Church stance on it; but I would hazard a guess that the Church would not condone this garbage.
Anything that messes with the mind even in such an “entertainment” context is very dubious.
What if the volunteer was afterwards deeply embarrassed by his/her antics on stage?
What if someone took the wrong idea from such “harmless” fun and teased said volunteer for a long time afterwards?
Nah, if I was you, I’d steer clear.
God Bless,
Colmcille.🙂
 
I don’t have a ready citation, but I was taught that hypnotism – like drunkenness – is a willing decision to compromise your own free will. Because it offends against your dignity as a free human being, and opens you to all sorts of sins and other evils, participating in hypnotism (or getting drunk!) constitutes grave matter for mortal sin.

It is serious business. You were right, I think, to stay away.

It’s too bad. I think hypnotism is fascinating – that our minds are so vulnerable to compromise with such little outside stimulus, how that works, how far it can go… but there are a lot of things I find fascinating that are also evil. Like the fall of Lucifer, for instance. Or the mind of an abortionist.

shrug
 
I think it’s spiritually dangerous to open yourself up to influence like that… it’s not the responsible thing to do

once you let something in, it gets easier for other things (ie demons) to get in

imo…

When I first came to university, there was a hypnotist visiting too, and many people went to see him… he made the volunteers do lots of crazy things… it kind of made me uncomfortable.

God gave us free will and I don’t think it’s right for anyone to interfere with that… God always respects our free will
 
I think hypnosis can have legitimate medical related benefits, such as an alternative to pain killers, giving up smoking etc., but common sense should tell us that anyone messing with our mind has got to have dangerous risks.

But this question is about entertainment. The word ‘lingerie’ should tell you enough of the nature of the entertainment offered and I think taking part in that would have been sinful.

Not all hypnotists are legit, some are just entertainers and I think audiences and subjects just go along with his suggestions as a mild form of mass hysteria.

A lot of people can’t be hypnotised but I sometimes wonder if that’s because they are the ones that won’t go along with the game?

I remember as a young teen going to the Great Franklin in Sydney at one of the big theatres. I was terrified of being hypnotised to go onto the stage after discovering that my fly zip had failed :o
 
People actually think this is sinful? Wow.

I can understand in the case of a hypnotist who is known for making people do inappropriate/sinful activities while they are hypnotized. Knowingly compromising your free will to someone who you know might “make” you do sinful things/lead others into scandal is sinful, I agree.

But to a friendly, fun hypnotist that just has his participants do silly and funny things? Even if you were to willingly consent to have your free will compromised in this situation, I don’t understand how this could be sinful.

I think that, like many things in life, the sinfulness of hypnosis depends on context.
 
pcg2 said:
People actually think this is sinful? Wow.

I can understand in the case of a hypnotist who is known for making people do inappropriate/sinful activities while they are hypnotized. Knowingly compromising your free will to someone who you know might “make” you do sinful things/lead others into scandal is sinful, I agree.

But to a friendly, fun hypnotist that just has his participants do silly and funny things? Even if you were to willingly consent to have your free will compromised in this situation, I don’t understand how this could be sinful.

I think that, like many things in life, the sinfulness of hypnosis depends on context.
Click to expand...
Hi pcg,
I think it’s safe to avoid giving any credence to hypnotism whether it’s in an entertainment context or not.
If a sizeable amount of people are doubtful about it as a form of entertainment then surely that is reason enough to have nothing to do with it.
God Bless,
Colmcille.
 
colmcille1 said:
Hi pcg,
I think it’s safe to avoid giving any credence to hypnotism whether it’s in an entertainment context or not.
If a sizeable amount of people are doubtful about it as a form of entertainment then surely that is reason enough to have nothing to do with it.
God Bless,
Colmcille.
Click to expand...
I guess I would have to respectfully disagree. Have you ever seen this done in person?
 
As a faithful Catholic and mental health therapist who utilizes hypnotherapy on occasion with clients, I can tell you
  1. Most stage hypnotherapists are frauds. Its mostly a show. When it’s not, they have little tricks to pick out the most gullible people.
  2. Hypnosis does not compromise your will. 95% of people go into a state of hypnosis almost daily. Have you ever zoned out while driving? You were in a state of hypnosis.
As for stage hypnosis being a sin or not, I heard that it was, but I can’t say I’ve ever seen anything official.
 
Like I said, what I wrote about hypnotism being sinful is just what I was taught from a young age. I was sufficiently intrigued by the other responses to go and dig a little deeper for an official teaching.

It turns out that the Catholic Encylclopedia has an astonishingly long article on the subject. I assume this is because it was written around the turn of the last century, when hypnotism was apparently a Big Deal. Anyhow, I read down into the article, and eventually I found a statement from the Holy Office (today known as the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith):
The Church has not waited for the verdict of science to put the faithful on their guard against the dangers of magnetism and hypnotism, and to defend the rights of human conscience; but, ever prudent, she has condemned only abuses, leaving the way free for scientific research. “The use of magnetism, that is to say, the mere act of employing physical means otherwise permissible, is not morally forbidden, provided that it does not tend to an illicit end or one which may be in any manner evil” (Response of the Holy Office, 2 June, 1840). The encyclical letter of the Sacred Penitentiary, Tribunal of August, 1856, only confirms this, and Père Coconnier has referred to it in his famous work “L’Hypnotisme franc”, in which he studies the subject apart from all extraneous considerations. Taking up the latest teachings of Rome, Canon Moureau, of Lille, writes: “Hypnotism is tolerated, in theory and in practice, to the exclusion of phenomena which would certainly be preternatural.” This is the opinion of most theologians, and it is the utterance of reason.
Click to expand...
Nevertheless, the Encyclopedia warns:
Hypnotism, therefore, is a dangerous, if not a morally detestable, practice. In the process of suggestion the individual alienates his liberty and his reason, handing himself over to the domination of another. Now, no one has any right thus to abdicate the rights of his conscience to renounce the duty towards his personality. It has been objected to this view that there is the same effect in intoxication or in the use of chloroform; but the argument is of no validity. Drunkenness is not justifiable; it is a grave sin against temperance. As for chloroform, it has its precise indications strictly marked. It is only lawfully employed in medicine to make insensible sick people who are about to undergo a surgical operation. Can hypnotism be employed in the same way as chloroform? Has it any social utility, or does it play a humanitarian rôle in any way? Its supporters have vainly endeavored to endow it with practical uses, in order to give it a scientific turn, but in spite of all their efforts, hypnotism remains, not only an idle curiosity, but a dangerous game.
Click to expand...
Interesting. Very interesting.

It seems that the Church agrees with pcg2:
I think that, like many things in life, the sinfulness of hypnosis depends on context.
Click to expand...
…and even this assumes that the hypnotism is authentic, which Penitus assures us is rarely, if ever, the case, or that hypnotism is remotely as powerful as either the stage hypnotists or the Catholic Encyclopedia of 1917 seemed to think, which seems dubious.
 
Right. And it also precludes that hypnosis is an almost “magical” solution to problems… that is, people quit smoking in less than one hour, etc.

In reality, miracle or magical changes are rare, even in hypnosis.

It is not mind control. Scooby Doo lied to us.
 
You absolutely DO NOT “give up your free will” during authentic hypnosis. All hypnosis is self-hypnosis in that YOU consent to relaxation and auto-suggestions which can then work in your subconscious. Without that consent, there is no hypnosis, but you still must WILL the positive effects.

Hypnosis is a medically accepted method of therapy for many, many conditions, including many addictions. It is proven to aid in the effectiveness of other forms of treatment when used together, and hypnotism can often produce positive results when nothing else can.

There is nothing occult or magical about either the way it works or its results. It’s a matter of positive suggestion – “self-talk” – which works in the background.

There have been countless documented clinical studies done on this method of therapy and its widely respected in the medical community.

Sure, it can be used for entertainment – but you still cannot be controlled with hypnosis – you simply must agree to the process and the suggestions for it to work at all.

There absolutely are pseudo-psychohypnotherapists that will gleefully take your money and produce no results – but there are legions of reputable ones.

Citing a document that was written before any of the above research was done or before it became known how hypnosis works is a bit irresponsible. Research the science of hypnosis – the web is full of it.

There are other threads in CAF archives, and the final answer was that the Church does not hold it to be sinful.
 
Penitus, I will have to disagree with you. Most Stage Hypnotists like myslef are real , there is a small percent who use “stooges” or people who they have previously hypnotized. I am a friend of many vegas stage hypnotists and alot of them do both stage and hypnotherpay. Also we do not use any "tricks’ to find “gullible” people.We do use suggestibility tests like magnetuc finger, the lemon drop test, locked hands, to find the most suggestible people for the show b/c it is very different from hypnotherapy. We have about 15 minutes total to get from the pre-talk to the pre- tests to the Induction about 5 minutes for each. Therefore we need to find the people who will go under deeply and quickley b/c unlike in the therapy I do not have an hour to focus on doing just the induction I have 5 to 7 minutes at most. For the Church’s teaching I have been told by priests, deacons, bishops and even a major in canon law and theology that it is moral for entertainment and therapy
  • In Christ
    Tyler Carter C.H, CCH.
 
PROPER hypnosis is a very, very good thing and has nothing to do with spirituality.

It is imposible to do anything against your morals even while hypnotized. Mythbusters even tested it. Busted.
 
edwest2 said:
Well, Mythbusters is the final word then. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
They did an experiment that could be repeated and got results consistent with what respected hypnotherapists said would happen. But you don’t believe that, apparently, which is that you can’t do anything against your morals.

This isn’t really up for debate. If it’s against your morals, you won’t be hypnotized into doing it. This is universally agreed upon by those who study hypnotherapy. But you don’t believe that apprently.

BTW, that eyeroll was very rude.
edwest2 said:
Here are a few words from the Hypnotherapists’ Union:

hypnotherapistsunion.org/laws/usa/
Click to expand...
Yeah, that’s a summary of state laws regarding hypnosis all right. Okay then.

A few words about the Church’s position:
edwest2 said:
catholic.org/diocese/diocese_story.php?id=25480

I’m quite glad the Church leaves the way free for scientific research, because when used properly and not for spiritual purposes, and with the proper precautions, hypnosis is a very, very good thing.
edwest2;7218361:
God bless,
Ed
Click to expand...
You too Ed, but don’t roll your eyes at the things I write. I’m no expert but I’ve read several books on the subject of hypnosis written by experts. I’ve done some homework on the subject.

Also, you act like the Mythbusters’ experiments aren’t real experiments. Why? Because they’re popular? The results they got were consistent with what hypnotherapists and hypnotists who aren’t charlatans or hacks have been saying for years. 🤷
Click to expand...
 
I am sorry about the eyeroll. I view Mythbusters with suspicion. It is always good to do your own research on any subject.

I have noticed a recent increase in what I call pathological skepticism. By this I mean people do not look at a subject with the proper balance, but use emotional diatribes as their reason for being right about this or that subject. This also applies to some people who identify themselves as professional skeptics but still produce articles that are misleading at best and outright false at worst.

Hypnosis as entertainment can be problematic in some cases. Hypnosis used for some therapeutic purpose is, of course, valuable.

Peace,
Ed
 
Thank you for the apology, I accept.

Yes, for entertainment purposes, there are rare cases where it MAY be problematic. That is true, though the jury is out, so to speak, even on that.

I’ve read two books on the subject of self-hypnosis. One I read a while back and I cannot remember the title or author, though I believ it was written by a Doctor.

One I read rather recently and was titled “The Idiot’s Guide to Hypnosis” or something similar, written by Dr. Roberta Temes (I think I spelled that right, anyway), a hypnotherapist. Don’t let the title fool you; it’s an excellent read and debunks a lot of myths about hypnotherapy and hypnosis in general.

She does counsel against past-life regression and trying to retrieve buried memories.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top