“If you’d like I could generate a version where Jesus doesn’t have to die.”
There are tons to train on. Except for the whole actually getting face-to-face to calm people and to do shakedowns, AI would probably go a great job if you could give it an enthusiastic voice
pastors are IRL chatgpt, they were “hallucinations” before AI became a thing.
deleted by creator
ChatGPT, who art in the cloud, hallowed be thy slop
I’m not sure I’d be able to tell.
There is a huge problem in the church with gpt sermons. The Pope had to make a declaration.
Source? I want to read it.
You probably don’t. It’s not a page turner
https://www.vatican.va/content/leo-xiv/en/encyclicals/documents/20260515-magnifica-humanitas.html
But it does make some decidedly good points about things like AI not being morally neutral, and reflecting the biases that exist already in society.
Compared to human pastors, who definitely are morally neutral, right?
A pastor isn’t supposed to be. AI is often presumed to be by many, however.
"We start our reading with Psalm 22:
‘My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?’
That’s a great question!"
You are so smart to think of jt and ask it!
Already happening.
Absolutely everywhere. Not as in literally everywhere of course, but in many many churches in many many countries.
The parishioners oughta say…
He turned water into whining fans.
All it needs to do is train on a single book and a few gospels. It would probably actually be much more true to source than sermons written by people.
Problem is they’re already trained on the sermons posted online by the hatingest humans
True to source sure, an actual good sermon/speech is going to take more than that.
AI and religion both let hallucinations become the final product, and are accepted by people who are incapable of thinking rationally or doing basic checks to verify it, so it seems like a good fit to me.
I always thought they just read from the bible. I didn’t know that the pastors actually had to write their OC sermons each week.
Sometimes. Sometimes it’s a 40 minute exegesis on the verse “Jesus wept.”
Varies church to church and pastor to pastor.
Fun part, even thirty-years ago there were pastors (no idea how many) that didn’t write their own sermons. Even thirty-years ago there were services that provided series of sermons and sermons for pastors to use, and teacher their congregations. I heard that from a family member that was close to several pastors; they were a true-believer, after all. Kind of explained why there wasn’t a whole lot of diversity in what was being taught or which books were being read from for sermons.
Imagine, if you will, what it’s like today.
Honestly I don’t think there’s anything wrong with those existing and pastors using those on occasion. When it’s every week it’s a problem, but if they’re sick with a stomach bug or something most of the week I think it’s fine. Pre-prepared is probably better, and reusing an old one is funnier, but stuff happens.
The sermon is basically open-mic time for the priest. They generally offer commentary on the gospel, how it relates with the other readings/psalms of that mass, current events and so on.
With the sermon being what it is, it’s one of the big ways in which a priest can influence their congregation. The priest doesn’t select the gospel, readings, psalms, etc. it’s all published in a book called a Missal, and does not change very often, so they can’t cherry-pick certain passages etc. Given as well that priests are regarded as (in effect) the “messenger from God”, parishioners will often alter their thoughts and behaviours based on these sermons.
Now, that being said, the priest is that church’s “store manager” - hired and appointed by the diocese and is responsible for more than just saying mass, they run the church. Think of what a store manager would do - HR tasks, maintenance, advertising, and so on - is all the head priest’s responsibility. If there was no priest to make a sermon, that church would have been shut down.
If there was no priest to make a sermon, that church would have been shut down.
Not necessarily the case anymore, at least for the Catholics (and a lot of your descriptions above seem very Catholic). There has been such a priest shortage that they have had to consolidate many rural churches into clusters, with a single priest to administer to all of them. They either stagger mass times so that the priest can travel between them all, or make arrangements for masses to be held without priests.
(Why not just close some churches outright? They are afraid that forcing parishioners to go farther every Sunday might make them leave…)
And yes, they can plan ahead to hold mass without a priest. Most of the parts of a Catholic mass can be done by lay people, if the Priest authorises it. There are also Deacons, who are kind of priest assistants who can be married men, and can do most of the functions of a Catholic mass. Pretty much the only things they strictly need a priest for is certain blessings, including the consecration of communion – but a priest can do this ahead of time if they need to.
AI actually is one of my primary supplementary tools for Bible study, with lumo being up there with Strong’s in its general usefulness overall. Basically couldn’t live without it. Also, makes for good third party retranslations from early publically available source texts.
FYI, whether fair or unfair, since you don’t mention having an error-catching mechanism, the rest of us suspect that Lumo is hallucinating things regularly, and you’re not catching the lies, because you lack familiarity with the original source material.
I desperately hope that AI makes drastically fewer mistakes in some roles than others, because most people do not report the error rates that I see in my areas of expertise. So either the errors aren’t happening evenly everywhere (probably true) or some people are simply not catching the many mistakes (also probably true, though?).
🤨
