(ANALYSIS) It seemed inevitable that the first encyclical from the first American pope, the forward-looking and worldly-wise Leo XIV, would focus on the growing furor over artificial intelligence.
As reported here, Leo’s “Magnifica Humanitas” (“Magnificent Humanity”) proclaims alarms about dehumanization, economics, psychological peril and unbridled power within a sweeping social-justice manifesto that echoes Pope Leo XIII’s groundbreaking “Rerum Novarum” (“Of New Things”) of 1891.
Like the current pontiff, tech entrepreneurs have also worried about dangers with the ability to manipulate information as humanity does, but at an unimaginably vast scale and speed.
READ: The Pope, The Press And AI
A May 7 Associated Press roundup depicted how businesses are seeking religious guidance. A May 26 scientific article said theologians are advising Anthropic on how to impose morality upon inanimate chatbots. Last December, Lilly Endowment granted $50 million to a University of Notre Dame effort to build an ethical foundation for this booming technology.
The new encyclical comes as the culmination of various articles during recent weeks about AI’s implications for religion. Here’s a sampling of materials to consider alongside Leo’s magnum opus.
Ross Douthat, author of the 2025 classic “Believe: Why Everyone Should Be Religious,” wrote in his May 10 New York Times column that A.I., with its virtual “machine God,” poses the most fundamental questions about our human identity, consciousness, will, and reason. He sees three possible responses.
For many, A.I. is “a win for atheism and a blow against religious ideas of soul and spirit,” with our minds seen as “just computers.” Others think religion is enhanced when the mystery of our personal consciousness becomes more profound and humanity more exceptional. A third attitude is simply becoming more uncertain about everything.
A March 26 report from the University of Chicago and Northwestern University suggests AI and robotics may be a factor in the 21st-century decline in religious affiliation. These scholars observe that “historically, people have deferred to supernatural agents and religious professionals to solve instrumental problems beyond the scope of human ability” that now “may seem more solvable” through technology.
Then this unsettling phenomenon. As Religion Unplugged reported on May 21, a Barna Group poll found that 30% of adults, and 34% of practicing Christians, agree “strongly” or “somewhat” that “spiritual advice from artificial intelligence is just as trustworthy as advice from a pastor,” a confidence that reaches 44% with the “Millennial” generation. Naturally, clergy members are far more skeptical.
A related May 15 article by The Wall Street Journal’s Mary Julia Koch surveys chatbots like Text With Jesus that people are using for such guidance, but then quotes theologians’ common-sense assertions that lonely teens who become addicted to online lives would benefit the most from in-person religious involvement and that the smartest machines cannot replace personal relationships with people — or a personal God.
A similar argument came in an April 22 New York Times op-ed by Northeastern University psychology professor David DeSteno. He asserts that those chatbots “might have a mind (of sorts)” but study of “how morality works” in practice underscores that they lack “a crucial mechanism by which religion fosters moral growth.”
That is, an actual body is required for such emotions as gratitude, awe, compassion or guilt. With belief, it’s not sufficient to identify or think a particular way. Religion’s scientifically demonstrated benefits in health and well-being work with the people who actually practice it by participating in worship, praying, singing, meditating or fasting.
Then there is AI’s authorship problem with preachers and religious writers. AI’s mastery of “scraping” massive data from existing writings on the Internet worsens the perennial temptation to falsely present other people’s sermons, writings, and ideas as their own. With amusing style, Katelyn Beaty, the editorial director of Brazos Press, offers a case study in a May 20 Substack column whose headline calls AI the “Perfect Tool for Celebrity Christian ‘Authors.’”
She recalled a promising book proposal submitted by an unnamed historian/theologian. To assess this potential project, she examined the new writer’s Substack postings and found telltale signs of an LLM (Large Language Model) such as “marketing speak,” tiny paragraphs, three-point lists and no sense of personal perspective or of human mistakes like typos or “clunky sentences.” She confirmed the hunch using AI detection tools, which she says urgently need improvement so book publishers and colleges can “spot the machines with certainty” and make sure writings are “created by human minds and hands.”
The writer in question “was brazenly taking an ethical shortcut in the name of Christian ministry,” she concluded, which is simply “intellectual theft.” If deceitful about authorship, what else is an author being deceitful about? Book buyers “want books written by humans” and trust publishers as their gatekeepers to assure this.
Another practical and “especially significant problem” was examined on May 21 by Michael Graham of The Gospel Coalition, an evangelical think tank. He said AI is too often unable to respond with “reliable and thorough” religious information. He thinks religions themselves should be providing more input and that the tech industry needs to devise a “principled pluralist framework” that’s non-sectarian yet fully, accurately, and fairly depicts the world’s multiplied religious traditions.
Richard N. Ostling was a longtime religion writer with The Associated Press and with Time magazine, where he produced 23 cover stories, as well as a Time senior correspondent providing field reportage for dozens of major articles. He is a recipient of the Religion News Association's Lifetime Achievement Award. He has interviewed such personalities as Billy Graham, the Dalai Lama, Mother Teresa and Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger (later Pope Benedict XVI); ranking rabbis and Muslim leaders; and authorities on other faiths; as well as numerous ordinary believers. He writes a bi-weekly column for Religion Unplugged.