Why Are Many Churches Still Fearful or Indifferent to Artificial Intelligence (AI)? (Part 1)
Fear and Caution
The integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) into various sectors has sparked a broad spectrum of reactions, and the church is no exception. The apprehension and acceptance of AI within religious communities stem from a complex interplay of ethical, theological, and practical considerations. Understanding why many churches are fearful of AI while others do not require a nuanced exploration of these factors.
Reasons for Fear and Caution
Ethical Concerns
Privacy, Surveillance, and Data Misuse
The ethical implications of AI technology in religious settings extend far beyond theoretical debates, touching on very real concerns that impact the trust and safety of congregational members. For example, the utilisation of facial recognition technology for attendance tracking or personalised content delivery raises significant privacy concerns. Churches must navigate the fine line between leveraging technology for administrative efficiency and respecting the individual's right to privacy. An instance where this balance was not maintained can be seen in a hypothetical scenario where a church's AI system inadvertently shares sensitive attendance data with third-party advertisers, leading to a breach of trust within the community.
Moreover, the potential for AI to be used in manipulating or influencing congregational behaviour cannot be underestimated. A notable example could involve an AI-driven content recommendation system that, albeit designed to enhance spiritual engagement, starts pushing certain theological viewpoints more aggressively, thereby subtly influencing the ideological makeup of the congregation. Such scenarios underscore the ethical dilemmas churches face in implementing AI technologies without compromising moral integrity or autonomy.
Theological Questions
Humanity, Divinity, and AI
The theological implications of AI challenge core religious beliefs and doctrines, particularly around the uniqueness of human life, the concept of the soul, and the nature of free will. The creation of AI systems with cognitive abilities that rival or even surpass human intelligence poses profound questions about what it means to be human and created in the image of God. For instance, if an AI were developed with the capacity for what appears to be independent thought or emotional responses, it would force religious scholars and leaders to confront questions about the soul's existence in artificial entities and the theological significance of human uniqueness.
The concept of free will, a fundamental aspect of many religious doctrines, is also brought into question with the advent of AI. If an AI can make decisions that appear autonomous, it challenges the traditional view that free will is a divine gift unique to humans. This raises existential questions about the role and purpose of humanity in a world where machines can replicate or exceed human decision-making capabilities. An illustrative example might involve an AI-driven counselling program used by a church to provide guidance to its members. Suppose this program starts making suggestions or decisions that significantly influence individuals' life choices. In that case, it will necessitate a theological reflection on the nature of guidance, decision-making, and divine will in the age of AI. The recent influx of Christian AI-based chatboxes like BibleMate, Pastors.io, and Text with Jesus[1] allows many to engage in conversation with these AIs. Joe Sun, who created Pastors.ai in 2022, commented, “The biggest challenge, he said, is to get churches to accept it. “There are mixed reactions — in one camp, people are blown away. They think it’s magical,” Suh said. “A second camp is a bit more skeptical, especially church leaders.” Some pastors even went as far as questioning the chatbot’s claims, arguing the tool distorts their words”[2] It is possible with ChatGPT 4 to create a church based church.bot, using the pastor’s avatar to create a chatbox that can welcome new visitors, answers questions about the church and its theological stands.
Loss of Human Touch
Impersonal Pastoral Care, Diminished Community Engagement, Eroded Worship Experience
The concern over the loss of human touch within church communities due to the integration of AI is a poignant reflection of the broader apprehensions about technology's role in our social and spiritual lives. Churches are not just places of worship but also vibrant communities where personal relationships, human warmth, and face-to-face interactions play a crucial role in nurturing faith and fellowship. The fear that AI could depersonalise these vital aspects of ministry is grounded in several specific worries and potential scenarios.
One of the most significant concerns is the impact of AI on pastoral care. Traditionally, pastoral care involves deeply personal, empathetic interactions between clergy and congregants, often in times of crisis, doubt, or personal struggle. The introduction of AI-driven tools for counselling or spiritual guidance raises questions about the quality and depth of care that can be provided without intuitive, compassionate human engagement. For example, if a church were to use a chatbot for initial counselling sessions, the lack of human empathy and understanding in these interactions might lead to a failure to provide comfort or adequately address the nuanced spiritual and emotional needs of the individual.
Churches also worry about the potential for AI to diminish the richness of community engagement. Community activities, from worship services to social gatherings, rely on the spontaneity and warmth of human interaction. The introduction of AI, for instance, in managing group activities or facilitating discussions, might streamline organisational aspects but could also strip away the personal touches that make community life vibrant and meaningful. An example of this could be a virtual AI facilitator for Bible study groups, which, while efficient, might lack the ability to foster deep personal connections and nuanced, empathetic discussions that arise in a human-led setting.
The central act of communal worship could also be affected by the reliance on AI. While technology can enhance the worship experience through improved accessibility or presentation, there is a concern that overreliance on AI, such as using AI-generated prayers or sermons, could make worship feel more manufactured and less divinely inspired. The essence of worship is not just in the words spoken or sung but in the collective human spirit of those gathered in faith. An AI system composing prayers or sermons lacks the personal testimony and lived experience that often makes these elements of worship profoundly impactful.
Fear of Replacement
Administrative and Operational Roles, Music Ministry, Pastoral Counseling and Spiritual Leadership
The fear of AI leading to the replacement of human roles within the church context extends across various aspects of church life, from the practical to the profoundly spiritual. This is in the present economic context where many corporations are retrenching their workers (which may not be due to AI, but the suspicion is there). This concern is not just about the automation of tasks but touches on deeper issues related to the value of human work, the essence of spiritual leadership, and the nature of community and worship that is inherently human.
At a basic level, the concern begins with administrative tasks. AI's capacity to streamline scheduling, manage databases, and handle communication can lead to the automation of many office roles traditionally filled by church staff. While the efficiency gained is undeniable, there's a valid concern that this could lead to job losses, impacting individuals who not only contribute their skills but also form part of the church's community fabric. For instance, a church secretary who also offers a listening ear and prayerful support to those who call or visit the church office represents a dual role that AI cannot replicate. However, it cannot be argued that AI is more efficient at taking notes and minutes of countless church committee meetings.
The apprehension extends to more creative roles like music ministry. AI's ability to compose music and even generate hymn lyrics could be seen as encroaching on an area deeply rooted in human emotion and spiritual expression. The thought of replacing choir directors or organists with AI-generated music raises questions about the loss of the human touch in worship, where the collective act of making music is as much about fellowship and spiritual expression as it is about the music itself. An example of this concern would be an AI program selecting and playing hymns for services, devoid of the personal selection process that often involves thoughtful prayer and consideration of the congregation's current spiritual journey. The AI compilation may be enhanced by feedback from congregants, worship leaders, and preachers to provide a holistic service, something that is not often done in the church.
Perhaps the most profound concern lies in the potential for AI to encroach upon the roles of pastoral counselling and spiritual leadership. While AI can offer programmed responses to common counselling scenarios, it lacks the ability to provide the deep empathy, discernment, and spiritual guidance that comes from years of theological study, personal faith, and pastoral experience. The idea that an AI chatbot could offer advice or counsel on complex personal or spiritual matters overlooks the nuanced understanding and compassionate presence that human pastors provide. This could lead to a depersonalised form of pastoral care that misses the mark in addressing the deeper spiritual needs of individuals.
Beyond the practical aspects, there's a deeper fear that the adoption of AI in church roles could lead to a broader undervaluing of human contributions. Each individual within a church, whether in a leadership role, a volunteer position, or a member of the congregation, brings unique gifts, experiences, and spiritual insights that enrich the community. The replacement of these roles with AI risks diminishing the value placed on these personal contributions, potentially impacting the sense of belonging and community that is central to church life.
Misunderstanding and Lack of Information
Misconceptions and Lack of Clarity, Sensationalized Media Portrayals
The trepidation surrounding the adoption of AI within various sectors, including religious institutions, is often exacerbated by a fundamental lack of clarity and understanding about the nature and capabilities of AI. The face of AI is often from movies such as The Matrix (1999), The Terminator (1984), and Her (2013), in which AI either uses humans as an energy source, earmarked for extermination, or for emotional engagement. This confusion is not unfounded, as AI encompasses a broad range of technologies and applications, from simple algorithms that automate repetitive tasks to more complex systems capable of learning and adapting over time. The gap in understanding what AI truly is and can do leads to a fertile ground for misconceptions and fears, often fueled by sensationalised portrayals in media and popular culture.
A common misconception is equating AI with science fiction scenarios where machines gain consciousness and turn against humanity. This portrayal taps into deep-seated fears of losing control and being overtaken by our creations. However, current AI technologies, while advanced, are far from achieving the kind of sentient autonomy depicted in movies and novels. The reality is that AI systems operate within a set of parameters defined by their human creators and are designed to perform specific tasks, ranging from data analysis to pattern recognition.
The role of media in shaping public perceptions of AI cannot be understated. Films, television shows, and sensational news stories often depict AI in extreme scenarios, focusing on the potential for catastrophe rather than the technology's beneficial applications. This has led to a skewed perception of AI as inherently dangerous or destined to spiral out of human control. For example, the dramatisation of AI systems hacking into critical infrastructure or manipulating human behaviour in dystopian narratives plays into fears of AI's potential for malevolence or uncontrollable power.
Within the context of churches, these misconceptions and sensationalised portrayals contribute to apprehension about integrating AI into ministry and community life. The root of this fear is often the misconception, sometimes confused by even computer scientists, that artificial intelligence may be compared to human intelligence. This arises from recent advances in neurosciences on the human brain, which computer scientists are imitating with their neuropraxis. Comparing physicality can only take us so far. AI is cited in computers, and even quantum computing can take us nowhere close to the consciousness of a newborn child. Moreover, the lack of understanding about AI's actual capabilities leads to exaggerated fears that it could replace the human elements of worship, fellowship, and pastoral care, eroding the very foundation of church community.
So far, we have underscored the need for a balanced approach to integrating AI into church life, emphasising the important ethical considerations, and maintaining the human essence of spiritual practices. It suggests that we need to address the church’s fear of AI by misconceptions and misinformation. In the next post (Part 2), we shall focus on AI's potential to enhance rather than replace human-led ministry so churches can navigate the challenges and opportunities presented by technological advancements.
[1] Fiona André, A new AI app lets users ‘text’ with Jesus. Some call it blasphemy. The Washington Post, August 12, 2023. https://www.washingtonpost.com/religion/2023/08/12/text-with-jesus-chatgpt-ai/
[2] Christian News Service, Meet the Christian creators designing chatbots ‘with a biblical worldview’. https://religionnews.com/2023/07/20/meet-the-christian-creators-designing-biblically-inspired-chatbots/