Digital Formation of Pastoral Workers Based on the Teachings of the Catholic Church in the 21st Century

Abstract

The dynamic sociocultural changes occurring in contemporary society necessitate a continuous updating of formation models and programmes for current and future pastoral workers across all Christian Churches. While the origins of artificial intelligence (AI) date back to the 1950s, its pervasive integration into the daily lives of billions globally has accelerated dramatically in the 21st century. Concurrently, digital exclusion is gradually diminishing, and virtual reality significantly impacts the spiritual practices of both individual believers and ecclesiastical communities worldwide. Since the pontificate of John Paul II, the Catholic Church has maintained a dual perspective on digital technologies, viewing them both as a potential threat to faith and as an unprecedented opportunity for evangelization. Pope Francis further intensified this dynamic approach, which continues under Pope Leo XIV, as confirmed by the encyclical ‘Magnifica humanitas’, published on 25 May 2026. This article aims to address the following research question: What constitutes the contemporary model of digital formation for Catholic pastoral workers? A substantive analysis of official 21st-century magisterial documents was conducted to address this issue. The analysis yielded a proposed framework for the required digital formation of Catholic ministers. This study is limited by the absence of empirical verification regarding the practical application of the proposed model, presenting an essential avenue for future social research.

1. Introduction

During the Second Vatican Council, a proposal was advanced to establish World Communications Day (The Second Vatican Council 1963, no. 18). World Communications Day (WCD) was first celebrated in 1967 at the behest of Pope Paul VI. Since then, successive pontiffs have published annual messages for WCD, addressing critical and contemporary challenges regarding the Church’s mission in relation to the media. Paul VI issued twelve such messages; John Paul II—twenty-seven; Benedict XVI—eight; Francis—twelve; and Leo XIV promulgated his first message for the 60th WCD in 2026. Several of these messages explicitly address the media formation of pastoral workers, highlighting the necessity of preparing them to utilize and co-create faith communication through digital tools. A document of the Holy See dated 2002 issued the following appeal:

Priests, deacons, religious, and lay pastoral workers should have media education to increase their understanding of the impact of social communications on individuals and society and help them acquire a manner of communicating that speaks to the sensibilities and interests of people in a media culture. Today this clearly includes training regarding the internet, including how to use it in their work.

(Pontifical Council for Social Communications 2002, no. 11)

To date, few studies have addressed the digital formation of pastoral workers, typically confining the discourse to the use of digital media in religious education (Chmielewski 2020a, 2020b; Zając 2024; Papakostas 2025; Mąkosa and Chrostowski 2025; Chrostowski and Mąkosa 2026), as tools supporting religious leadership roles (Nord and Schleier 2025; Schlag et al. 2025), or as mechanisms facilitating the pastoral training systems in a diocese (Davinsi et al. 2025). Empirical research conducted on a small sample of Polish Catholic priests confirmed divergent perspectives—encompassing both proponents and sceptics—regarding the deployment of AI in pastoral care (Ignatowski et al. 2024). Proponents identify opportunities for AI integration primarily within informational and religious education spheres. Conversely, sceptics caution against online religious disinformation, which leads to theological errors, and warn against the dehumanization of interpersonal relationships resulting from the overreliance on digital tools. Based on the cited literature, it is evident that while AI solutions offer viable applications in pastoral ministry, they also have clear limitations and pose potential threats to both individuals and society.

Although many contemporary authors address the deployment of digital tools and AI in pastoral care, they offer only cursory remarks on the fundamental challenge of the digital formation of pastoral workers. This article aims to address this lacuna by proposing a structural model for the digital formation of Catholic pastoral workers. The central question of this study is formulated as follows: what model of digital formation for pastoral workers is prescribed by the Magisterium of the Catholic Church in the 21st century? While the digital reality is analysed comprehensively in the subsequent sections, two core concepts, i.e., “pastoral model” and “formation”, require operational clarification in this introduction.

One of the primary tasks of pastoral theologians is to develop theologically sound and practically viable models of the Church’s salvific activity (Przygoda 2017). A pastoral model is defined as a simplified, descriptive, or graphical representation of the comprehensive or partial salvific activity of the Church. It encompasses both the normative and practical dimensions of this activity, thereby enabling contemporary analysis, evaluation, and future strategic planning (Hepp 1972). The objective of established pastoral models is to sustain and expand their practical application, whereas new models aim to orient pastoral workers and facilitate introduction to ecclesial life. Time and space are critical variables in pastoral models; consequently, universal models that remain unchanged across different temporal and geographical contexts do not exist. Sociocultural transformations and theological developments necessitate updating pastoral models used by local Churches. These models play an imperative role in the advancement of pastoral theology and the ongoing formation of the clergy, consecrated persons, and lay Catholics (Przygoda 2006).

According to Chlewiński, formation constitutes

the exertion of lasting influence by a person, group, or institution on another person’s personality with the aim of shaping within them, in accordance with an appropriate model, cognitive and evaluative psychological structures involving the internalization of a system of beliefs and values, and the development of skilful actions arising from these in a specific direction.

(Chlewiński 1989)

A defining characteristic of formation is the reciprocal—though non-proportional—relationship between the forming agent and the individual undergoing formation. The individual being formed is an active agent, independently assessing their developmental needs and personal trajectory. Thus, formation stimulates self-development, facilitates self-realization, and provides objective criteria for self-assessment. The term “digital formation” as employed in this study denotes a particular focus on the pedagogical and spiritual influences exerted on pastoral workers regarding digital reality. This aims to cultivate a mature personal relationship with technology, equip ministers to warn the faithful of digital perils, and identify constructive opportunities for deploying digital tools (including AI) within pastoral ministry.

The primary locus of this study focuses on answering a foundational question: What is the ultimate purpose of the digital formation of pastoral workers? A preliminary analysis of the 21st-century Magisterium suggests a dual objective: first, to alert pastoral workers to the existential and ministerial threats posed by the digital ecosystem—specifically the rapid evolution of artificial intelligence, and second, to familiarize ministers and the laity with the contemporary digital tools to leverage them effectively for evangelization. The Catholic Church increasingly recognizes that virtual reality cannot be neglected, as it is deeply embedded in human existence, fundamentally alters interpersonal dynamics, and increasingly permeates the religious and spiritual domains. For formation frameworks, identifying the paths, means, and methods is as critical as understanding the overarching objective. Consequently, this analysis examines the mechanisms through which digital formation goals can be achieved, offering practical guidance for formation initiatives by diocesan and religious authorities.

2. Materials and Method

The objective of this study is to deduce the formal model established by the governing bodies of the Catholic Church regarding the digital formation of pastoral workers, thereby addressing the central research question: what model of digital formation for pastoral workers is contained in the teaching of the Catholic Church in the 21st century? To answer this question, a substantive qualitative content analysis of official 21st-century Catholic documents addressing the preparation of pastoral workers for ministry in the digital age was employed. Content analysis was selected as the primary qualitative method to uncover deeper structural meanings, interrelated thematic matrices, symbolic elements, and contextual descriptions of the investigated phenomenon (Abdelhamid et al. 2025, p. 539).

The analytical focus centred primarily on the papal messages for World Communications Day, published in the 21st century. From the perspective of the research question, key source texts include the messages of John Paul II (2001, 2002, 2005b), Benedict XVI (2009, 2010, 2011, 2013), Francis (2018, 2019, 2024b). Additional primary sources comprise John Paul II’s Apostolic Letter Rapid Development (2005a), Francis’s Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia (2016), relevant papal allocutions, and documents from various dicasteries of the Holy See, notably Towards Full Presence: A Pastoral Reflection on Engagement with Social Media (2023) and Antiqua et Nova (2025).

The secondary stage of the research employs methods of classification, systematization, and synthesis to construct the digital formation model and evaluate its internal coherence and completeness. Preliminary analysis of the magisterial texts supports the premise that the primary goal of digital formation is to familiarize pastoral workers with digital technologies, assist them in navigating this reality, and prepare them to execute their salvific ministry within an omnipresent digital culture. This analytical stage identified three core thematic areas in the source texts:

• The Church’s institutional concern for pastors to comprehend new digital media;
• The structural difficulties and existential threats posed by virtual reality to the salvific process of the faithful;
• The capacity for positive integration of digital tools into pastoral care.

These three thematic pillars establish the substantive framework for the proposed model. Given that formation encompasses diverse activities designed to transform attitudes and methodologies, the final output of this analysis synthesizes practical proposals for preparing pastoral workers to fulfil their mission within the digital milieu.

3. Results

For several decades, the Catholic Church has actively participated in the discourse surrounding digital technologies—and more recently, artificial intelligence—focusing predominantly on anthropological and ethical aspects. Grounded in its philosophical and theological traditions, the Church’s mission involves investigating the Christian understanding of human intelligence and confronting this paradigm with the rapid implementation of AI across various sectors of human activity. Broadly, the Church acknowledges the necessity of scientific and technological advancement in AI, yet seeks to safeguard human dignity, promote the integral development of the human person, and advocate for technological progress that serves humanity and the common good (Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Dicastery for Culture and Education 2025, 5–6; hereafter AN). The following sections present the systematic results of the content analysis across the three designated areas of digital formation.

3.1. The Church’s Concern for Pastoral Workers’ Knowledge and Understanding of New Digital Media

The mission of the Church is fundamentally anchored in interpersonal communication. Distinct from purely secular frameworks, the Church integrates the divine Persons—the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit—into this communicative paradigm. In the sub-apostolic era, communication primarily involved verbal and non-verbal personal dialogue. Rapidly, following the methodology of Christ, the Church integrated visual media—depicting the Saviour, Gospel narratives, and hagiographical exemplars—into its kerygmatic proclamation. The print revolution of the 16th century enhanced textual accessibility, a trajectory that subsequently extended to the press, cinema, radio, and television. Although the Church responded to these innovations with varying degrees of immediacy, it ultimately integrated them into its missiological framework. At the dawn of the 21st century, Pope John Paul II asserted:

…the Church cannot fail to be ever more deeply involved in the burgeoning world of communications. The global communications network is extending and growing more complex by the day, and the media are having an increasingly visible effect on culture and its transmission. Where once the media reported events, now events are often shaped to meet the requirements of the media.

(John Paul II 2001, 2)

Although various Christian communities utilized electronic media for religious information, evangelization, catechesis, and pastoral formation throughout the late 20th century, novel challenges continue to emerge in this domain (John Paul II 2005a, 2). While globalized communication is widely acknowledged, many pastoral workers remain oblivious to the extent to which electronic media condition personality development, conscience formation, emotional relationship structures, cultural consumption, and socio-political dynamics (John Paul II 2005a, 3). According to John Paul II, an even deeper epistemological challenge is the media’s systematic obfuscation of the boundary between truth and illusion, aligning with the postmodern critique of objective truth categories:

…media culture is so deeply imbued with a typically postmodern sense that the only absolute truth is that there are no absolute truths or that, if there were, they would be inaccessible to human reason and therefore irrelevant. In such a view, what matters is not the truth but “the story”; if something is newsworthy or entertaining, the temptation to set aside considerations of truth becomes almost irresistible.

(John Paul II 2001, 3)

Where classical philosophy sought the discovery of objective truth, postmodern paradigms view truth as an artificial construct, resulting in relative pluralism and volatile mutability. The Catholic Church maintains its mandate to proclaim absolute truth, identified christologically in Jesus Christ (cf. John 14:6); through digital media, it can extend this proclamation to a significantly broader demographic (John Paul II 2001, 2).

Benedict XVI observed that digital media operate through the simultaneous convergence of multimodal communication streams. As part of the digital ecosystem, textual data is continuously supplemented with additional material, including graphics, audio, video, and animation. The Christian tradition has historically leveraged a rich semiotic framework: crucifixes, icons, Marian imagery, nativity scenes, stained glass, and ecclesiastical frescoes have traditionally assisted pastors in the spiritual formation of the faithful. Much of the global artistic heritage was generated by artists seeking to reflect theological truths visually and acoustically. Benedict XVI maintained that mastery of these new linguistic modes is necessary not merely for historical synchronization, but to allow the infinite richness of the Gospel to find expressive vehicles capable of penetrating contemporary hearts and minds. Effective communication requires engaging the imagination and emotional sensitivity of recipients to effectively communicate the mystery of divine love (Benedict XVI 2013).

Civilizational advancement fundamentally restructures human life across all cultural, racial, and religious demographics. The advancement of information, telecommunications, and multimedia technologies represents an epochal shift in human history. It is worth recalling just how much the COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated the development of digital technologies and contributed to their widespread adoption, particularly in various areas of human communication (Chmielewski et al. 2022). The Fourth Industrial Revolution (Schwab 2016) has catalysed a rapid transition from an industrial to an information society wherein artificial intelligence occupies a central role. The First Industrial Revolution during the late 18th and early 19th centuries introduced profound sociocultural disruptions for which contemporary societies were unprepared, resulting in severe social costs. Consequently, historical analysis dictates that better preparation for the current digital revolution is imperative. Benedict XVI noted that radical shifts in communication fields dictate the trajectory of broader cultural transformations:

…new technologies are not only changing the world of communication but are also bringing about a vast cultural transformation. A new way of learning and thinking is developing, with unprecedented opportunities for establishing relationships and building fellowship.

(Benedict XVI 2011)

Francis corroborated this diagnostic assessment during his address at the Cathedral of Santa Maria del Fiore in Florence, noting that “One could say that today we are not living an epoch of change so much as an epochal change” (Francis 2015).

How does the Catholic Church conceptualize the distinct components of modern digital media? The internet was the initial catalyst in this digital landscape. John Paul II likened it to the ancient “forum”—the epicentre of political, economic, and religious public life. The Roman forum was a dense, dynamic urban space reflecting and generating cultural output. This imagery closely aligns with cyberspace, which expands human potential at the dawn of the millennium (John Paul II 2002, 2). In the early 21st century, it became evident that the Church must systematically comprehend the internet to “communicate effectively with people—especially young people—who are steeped in the experience of this new technology, and also in order to use it well” (Pontifical Council for Social Communications 2002, 5).

The Catholic Church maintains an ambivalent view of the internet. On one hand, it offers exceptional opportunities for evangelization if deployed competently and with an acute awareness of its systemic strengths and liabilities. By hosting vast information repositories and generating initial interest, it facilitates introductory encounters with the Christian kerygma, particularly among youth who use cyberspace as an epistemic window to the world. Digital networks provide extensive documentation, historical archives, and educational content regarding ecclesial doctrine and global humanitarian initiatives. However, access to information regarding God and the Church alone is fundamentally insufficient; the internet can never replace the immediate, existential experience of the divine mediated through the liturgical and sacramental life of the Church. Thus, pastoral strategy must develop transition mechanisms assisting individuals from virtual engagement to real communion as part of the physical parish community (John Paul II 2002, 3).

Conversely, a systemic liability of the internet is its reinforcement of a “culture of transience” (Sproncel 2022), which severely impedes the pursuit of enduring Christian vocations, whether in marriage, holy orders, or consecrated life. Youth frequently model interpersonal relationships on transient social media connections, which are easily severed or modified. The existential fear of restricting personal autonomy prevents long-term, responsible commitments. Pragmatism, utilitarianism, and narcissism

makes people incapable of looking beyond themselves, beyond their own desires and needs. Yet sooner or later, those who use others end up being used themselves, manipulated and discarded by that same mind-set.

(Francis 2016, 39)

While the internet democratizes information, it fails to transmit intrinsic values. The absence of a stable Christian axiology diminishes the perceived value of the human person in both natural and transcendent dimensions. Furthermore, digital networks fundamentally alter psychological relationships with time and space. Cognitive attention is diverted to the immediate, the pragmatic, and the easily accessible, marginalizing deeper speculative reflection. As John Paul II emphasized, authentic wisdom and understanding derive from a contemplative worldview rather than mere data accumulation:

They are the result of an insight which penetrates the deeper meaning of things in relation to one another and to the whole of reality. Moreover, as a forum in which practically everything is acceptable and almost nothing is lasting, the Internet favours a relativistic way of thinking and sometimes feeds the flight from personal responsibility and commitment.

(John Paul II 2002, 4)

While modern technology affords unprecedented avenues for deploying truth, reconciliation, and charity, its misuse generates profound existential harm, spreading ideological polarization, prejudice, and vilification (John Paul II 2005b, 1; Francis 2019).

Social media platforms represent digital tools that have captured a vast demographic, particularly among youth and middle-aged cohorts. Employing extensive online databases and automated AI algorithms, these platforms maintain a distinct advantage over the traditional static web due to the velocity with which they deliver hyper-personalized content to targeted users. Pope Benedict XVI argued:

The social media thus need the commitment of all who are conscious of the value of dialogue, reasoned debate and logical argumentation; of people who strive to cultivate forms of discourse and expression which appeal to the noblest aspirations of those engaged in the communication process. Dialogue and debate can also flourish and grow when we converse with and take seriously people whose ideas are different from our own.

(Benedict XVI 2013)

According to Francis, the contemporary media ecosystem is so pervasive that distinguishing it from everyday reality is practically impossible. Social media offers unparalleled informational connectivity, yet presents severe structural vulnerabilities regarding global information integrity. While designed to foster connection and solidarity, it remains highly susceptible to algorithmic manipulation and commercial data exploitation that disregards personal sovereignty. Francis highlights that the network metaphor underscores a decentralized matrix of pathways and nodes devoid of a singular vertical hierarchy:

From an anthropological point of view, the metaphor of the net recalls another meaningful image: the community. A community is that much stronger if it is cohesive and supportive, if it is animated by feelings of trust, and pursues common objectives. The community as a network of solidarity requires mutual listening and dialogue, based on the responsible use of language.

(Francis 2019)

The most recent paradigm shift in digital tools is marked by the democratization of artificial intelligence, moving beyond specialized computer science departments and tech conglomerates into the public sphere. Long anticipated by futurologists, AI has transitioned into a complex epistemological construct that radically alters human cognition. It develops at an unprecedented pace, shifting from standard machine-learning algorithms to advanced deep neural networks capable of autonomous information processing, content generation, and decision-making under high uncertainty. Contemporary deep learning and transformer architectures demonstrate capacities previously deemed exclusive to human intellect—including contextual comprehension, creative problem-solving, and dynamic environmental adaptation. AI is not merely a highly complex mechanism mimicking human attributes, but a multidimensional reality structurally impacting human existence across expanding domains (Przygoda et al. 2025, pp. 1–2).

Francis describes artificial intelligence as “a tool that is both fascinating and dangerous” (Francis 2024a). The delineation between AI as an instrument for integral development or a mechanism of existential threat depends on anthropological alignment. Francis stresses that technology reflects the transcendent nature of human intellect:

We experience a state of “outwardness” with respect to our biological being: we are beings inclined toward what lies outside-of-us, indeed we are radically open to the beyond. Our openness to others and to God originates from this reality, as does the creative potential of our intelligence with regard to culture and beauty. Ultimately, our technical capacity also stems from this fact. Technology, then, is a sign of our orientation towards the future.

(Francis 2024a)

Scientific innovation and technological iteration do not occur in a sociopolitical vacuum; they are not morally neutral. As fully human actions, they mirror choices conditioned by the ethical, personal, and cultural values of their creators and users. Consequently, Francis underscores that AI development cannot be assumed a priori to benefit human progress or peace; its deployment must intentionally respect core ethical tenets, such as “inclusion, transparency, security, equity, privacy and reliability” (Francis 2023, 2).

In his inaugural address to the College of Cardinals, Leo XIV affirmed that the immediate task of the Church involves responding to the latest industrial revolution and the expansion of AI, which introduces critical challenges to human dignity, justice, and labour structures (Leo XIV 2025d). Aligning with the magisterial trajectory of Pope Francis, Leo XIV maintains that while the Church cannot arrest technological acceleration, it must actively engage in defining the ethical architecture governing AI. Absent from this ethical framework, it risks AI becoming an instrument of personal deconstruction, systemic dehumanization, and global social destabilization. AI appears simultaneously as a powerful cognitive amplifier—extending human intellect and broadening speculative horizons—and as a threat to fundamental human agency if misused. In purely analytical fields, AI mitigates cognitive drudgery and streamlines complex decision-making, yet introduces hazards of cognitive dependency and intellectual atrophy. In socio-emotional domains, AI can simulate connectivity, yet carries risks of artificial empathy and social atomization (Leo XIV 2025d). Consequently, the foundational objective of digital formation requires pastoral workers to systematically comprehend the ontological distinctions between human and AI (cf. AN, 7–29) and articulate this essential difference (cf. AN, 30–35).

3.2. Virtual Reality as a Threat and Obstacle to the Salvific Process of Believers

At the dawn of the 21st century, the proliferation of digital media accelerated rapidly, accompanied by an increasing body of empirical research examining the impact of emerging technologies on human existence. Alongside optimistic prognoses regarding the socio-economic and cultural advancement of humanity, critical reflections emerged concerning the potential existential and spiritual hazards of these technologies. This dualism found distinct resonance in the Magisterium of the Catholic Church. John Paul II, with his typical philosophical sensitivity, identified a profound risk posed by new technologies regarding the dissemination of epistemological and axiological relativism in social life (John Paul II 2001). He observed that the era of modern certainties had irrevocably yielded to a postmodern milieu, necessitating that the human community—including Christian believers—navigate an intellectual climate marked by a perceived lack of meaning, transience, and impermanence (John Paul II 2025a, 7). Crucially, the Polish Pontiff identified a major pedagogical and pastoral challenge, noting that while contemporary technologies substantially enhance the velocity, volume, and accessibility of communication, they frequently lack the capacity to facilitate that profound, existential exchange between minds and hearts which ought to characterize communication in the service of solidarity and love (John Paul II 2005a, 13).

Postmodern culture is intrinsically fluid, and contemporary media technologies have further accelerated the destabilization of objective truth and traditional values. Leo XIV observed that the advent of AI is inextricably linked to profound societal transformations that impinge upon essential dimensions of the human person, including critical thinking, discernment, learning, and interpersonal dynamics. While acknowledging that AI has opened unprecedented horizons for creativity, he raised substantial concerns regarding its capacity to diminish humanity’s openness to truth, beauty, wonder, and contemplation (Leo XIV 2025a).

Consequently, Leo XIV appealed to educators, parents, and pastoral care workers to critically evaluate the neurological and intellectual ramifications of modern media on youth, thereby ensuring a balanced trajectory towards maturity and responsibility. In the view of the Pontiff, the capacity to access vast quantities of data must not be conflated with the ability to derive meaning and value. Thus, it remains imperative to educate the younger generation to use these digital tools critically, drawing on their personal intellect to ensure an openness to spiritual depth, fraternal life, and authentic ethical decision-making (Leo XIV 2025a).

Benedict XVI also recognized the expansive communicative potential brought about by the internet, noting that its integration into social media architectures accelerated interpersonal connectivity. He observed a novel paradigm shift wherein communication transitioned from a unidirectional transmission of data into an interactive space for dialogue, solidarity, and relationship building. Nonetheless, he warned that digital communication creates systemic opportunities for self-falsification, enabling individuals to present fragmented or embellished personas. According to Benedict XVI, young people are particularly susceptible to these dangers, navigating a tension between digital enthusiasm and existential anxiety. The ease with which public profiles can be artificially constructed risks fostering intellectual and spiritual lassitude, while an excessive preoccupation with virtual reality can erode personal authenticity and create an illusion of community (Benedict XVI 2011).

An additional systemic threat exacerbated by digital tools is the amplification of racial, national, ethnic, or religious animosity, which can incite violence and geopolitical conflict. In such scenarios, rather than foster global unity, media platforms may be weaponized to demonize marginalized groups and fuel collective fear (John Paul II 2005b). Consequently, media professionals bear a rigorous ethical responsibility to counter narratives of hatred and violence, actively contributing instead to peacebuilding and international dialogue.

The intersection of advanced digital technologies—specifically artificial intelligence—and the preservation of global peace was prominently addressed by Francis in his Message for the World Day of Peace 2024. While generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) architectures can produce highly persuasive and credible outputs, these statements are frequently untethered from objective reality and may perpetuate underlying biases. Francis noted that the deployment of AI in disinformation campaigns is a severe societal challenge, systematically eroding public trust in media institutions.

Furthermore, data privacy, intellectual property, and confidentiality are at heightened risk. The misuse of these technologies carries severe negative outcomes, including systemic discrimination, interference in democratic electoral processes, the rise of surveillance capitalism, digital exclusion, and an intensified individualism that atomizes the human community, thereby obstructing avenues to peace (Francis 2023, 3).

According to Francis, an even more acute existential threat is posed by autonomous lethal weapon systems (LAWS) governed by AI, which can identify and strike targets without direct human intervention. These systems lead to an intractable ethical crisis, as they fundamentally lack the unique human capacity for moral judgement and empathetic decision-making (Francis 2023, 6). Accordingly, Francis urged the international community to consider a prohibition on the development of such weaponry, or at least, to enforce mandatory and significant human oversight, asserting that no machine should ever determine the termination of human life (Francis 2024a).

With the expansive capabilities of AI, Francis identified profound anthropological and sociological dangers. Human beings, limited and mortal by nature, frequently harbour a desire to transcend all existential constraints. In seeking absolute autonomy in technological self-sufficiency—driven by a technocratic paradigm—humanity risks falling prey to a technological dictatorship. This Promethean desire threatens to widen socio-economic inequalities even more, limiting wealth and knowledge to an elite minority, thereby undermining democratic governance and peaceful coexistence (Francis 2023, 4).

Furthermore, individuals face heightened exposure to systemic bias and algorithmic discrimination due to a lack of diverse mediation or the inherent limitations of automated systems. Critical determinations—such as evaluating loan eligibility, employment suitability, recidivism risks, or access to political asylum and social welfare—are increasingly delegated to AI models (Francis 2023, 5). This automated categorization of individuals carries profound repercussions for social cohesion. Francis contends that fundamental respect for human dignity requires a rejection of any paradigm that reduces human uniqueness to a mere dataset. Algorithmic frameworks must not be permitted to dictate human rights, supersede core values of compassion and mercy, or eliminate the human capacity for personal transformation and redemption (Francis 2023, 5).

A concurrent threat to human dignity is the proliferation of digital misinformation and “fake news” on an unprecedented scale. This involves the strategic dissemination of fabricated or distorted data designed to manipulate public perception. While this can occur unintentionally via generative AI “hallucinations”—wherein systems fabricate false data under the guise of reality (AN, 86)—more pernicious are deliberate campaigns orchestrated for economic profit or political subversion. The efficacy of fake news relies largely on its mimetic quality; creators exploit prevailing stereotypes, cultural prejudices, and visceral human emotions such as fear, contempt, and anger. Consequently, even rigorous fact-checking and public denials often fail to repair the extensive damage inflicted upon social relations fully (Francis 2018).

The evolution of generative AI has further facilitated sophisticated modalities of image and audio manipulation, most notably “deepfakes”. These highly credible yet entirely fabricated audiovisual assets depict individuals performing actions or uttering statements that never occurred. Although simulated technologies hold functional utility in specialized industries, their application becomes ethically perverse when weaponized to distort interpersonal relationships and objective reality. While the media assets themselves are artificial, the psychological and reputational harm they inflict is tangible, leaving deep scars on the human dignity of the victims (AN, 87).

Additionally, the digital revolution encourages the formation of ideological echo chambers. The Argentine Pontiff warned that rather than enhancing information pluralism, automated curation risks submerging users in standardized intellectual environments that serve market forces or political hegemony. He cautioned against a collective abdication of editorial responsibility and the homogenization of thought through big data. Reducing reality to quantifiable metrics entails a significant loss of objective truth, which stifles human communication and degrades the essence of humanity (Francis 2024b). Ultimately, the ethical deployment of AI depends on the moral disposition of its developers and users:

Artificial intelligence systems can help to overcome ignorance and facilitate the exchange of information between different peoples and generations. […] Yet, at the same time, they can be a source of “cognitive pollution”, a distortion of reality by partially or completely false narratives, believed and broadcast as if they were true.

(Francis 2024b)

Reflecting on the trajectory of digital media, Francis noted that while the initial wave of social media demonstrated a marked ambivalence—balancing positive connectivity with severe behavioural pathologies—the emergence of generative AI constitutes an unprecedented qualitative leap. It is therefore vital to cultivate a critical understanding and establish robust regulatory frameworks to govern tools with significant potential for harm. Because algorithms are inherently non-neutral artefacts reflecting the biases of their creators, proactive ethical frameworks (algor-ethics) are indispensable to mitigate discriminatory and socially unjust outcomes (Francis 2024b).

Finally, a highly subtle yet significant theological threat concerns the preservation of the integrity of Christian faith. The attempt to substitute divine authority with technological constructs aligns with the biblical definition of idolatry (cf. Exod 20:4; 32:1–5; 34:17). Modern AI may prove considerably more deceptive than historical idols, devoid of the capacity to speak, hear, or see (cf. Ps 115:5–6). Conversely, AI can simulate conversational engagement, provide answers, and offer artificial companionship to the lonely or infirm. However, as noted in document of the Holy See:

Yet, it is vital to remember that AI is but a pale reflection of humanity—it is crafted by human minds, trained on human-generated material, responsive to human input, and sustained through human labour. AI cannot possess many of the capabilities specific to human life, and it is also fallible. By turning to AI as a perceived “Other” greater than itself, with which to share existence and responsibilities, humanity risks creating a substitute for God. However, it is not AI that is ultimately deified and worshipped, but humanity itself—which, in this way, becomes enslaved to its own work.

(AN, 105)

3.3. Opportunities for the Positive Use of Digital Tools in Pastoral Care

The Catholic Church views contemporary digital media as instruments with immense potential for reaching geographically dispersed or marginalized populations, particularly within the framework of evangelization. Early in the 21st century, John Paul II emphasized that a substantial portion of humanity remained unacquainted with the Christian message, urging a renewed commitment to the missio ad gentes. While an effective response to this global imperative transcends technological solutions, Christians cannot disregard digital avenues. John Paul II asserted that the media can play an essential role in direct evangelization and in articulating values that uphold human dignity, viewing the Church’s digital presence as a vital component of the inculturation of the Gospel (John Paul II 2001, 4).

Communication is intrinsic to the ecclesial nature of the Church, which is mandated to proclaim the salvific message of Christ. Consequently, the Church employs digital platforms to expand the proclamation of the Word and to deepen communal solidarity among disciples. These media display the universal character of the People of God, facilitating direct exchange between local Churches and strengthening cooperation (John Paul II 2005a, 6). Furthermore, modern communication technologies necessitate a pastoral and cultural re-evaluation, offering novel organizational mechanisms for ecclesial governance. Accordingly, the Pontiff encouraged pastoral leaders to integrate interactive communication modalities into their evangelical strategies (John Paul II 2005a, 8), issuing a courageous appeal to media professionals:

Do not be afraid of new technologies! These rank “among the marvellous things”—inter mirifica—which God has placed at our disposal to discover, to use and to make known the truth, also the truth about our dignity and about our destiny as his children, heirs of his eternal Kingdom.

(John Paul II 2005a, 14)

John Paul II maintained that the internet offers ample opportunities for evangelization, provided it is utilized with professional competence and a critical awareness of its structural limitations. Primarily, by disseminating information and stimulating intellectual curiosity, the digital space facilitates an initial encounter with the Christian kerygma. However, he underscored that the internet can never supplant the profound, immediate experience of the divine mediated through the liturgical and sacramental life of the Church; rather, digital resources may become a valuable asset in preparing individuals for Christ and supporting their integration into the community of believers (John Paul II 2002).

During the pontificate of Benedict XVI, the rapid evolution of audiovisual resources prompted a sustained encouragement for pastoral workers to embrace digital communication—such as video, blogs, and interactive websites—to enhance dialogue, catechesis, and evangelization. Benedict XVI noted that by adopting these contemporary resources, pastors could effectively introduce secularized individuals to ecclesial life, assisting youth in discerning the Christian message. This engagement requires not merely technical proficiency, but a profound priestly spirituality grounded in internal dialogue with Christ. Consecrated persons in media sectors carry a unique responsibility to maintain high-quality interpersonal dynamics that address authentic spiritual needs (Benedict XVI 2010). Concurrently, the Pontiff invited young Christians, as digital natives, to bear authentic witness to their faith, effectively evangelizing the “new digital continent” (Benedict XVI 2009).

The emergence of social networking sites during Benedict XVI’s pontificate was quickly recognized as a viable tool for constructing relationships of a spiritual nature. The Pope acknowledged that digital networks form an integral component of contemporary human existence, contributing to complex intellectual and spiritual horizons and a heightened shared consciousness. This digital infrastructure can be leveraged to articulate core tenets of faith, provided that the communication is respectful, sensitive, and intellectually engaging (Benedict XVI 2011).

In this view, social media platforms facilitate the shared experience of spiritual and liturgical resources, fostering a sense of proximity among geographically separated believers. Interactive engagement with secular or doubting individuals highlights the necessity for Christians to maintain personal theological consistency and active charity. Online platforms frequently offer contemporary spaces for prayer, meditation, and scriptural reflection. Far from replacing physical reality, initial online contact often is a catalyst for individuals to rediscover the value of direct community engagement and pilgrimage. Benedict XVI stressed that the witness of faith demands absolute consistency across both physical and digital spaces (Benedict XVI 2013). Consequently, his theological reflections called for a sustained inculturation of the Gospel into the digital milieu, aligning the timeless human desire for communication with the nature of humanity created in the image of a communicative God (Benedict XVI 2009).

Despite inherent structural risks, AI is a significant tool for human and social development. Francis noted that AI could foster substantial innovations in sectors such as agriculture, education, and culture, thereby enhancing living standards and promoting human fraternity (Francis 2023, 6). Given that education and culture are intrinsically tied to the Church’s global mission, these areas represent key opportunities for AI application. Contemporary youth rely heavily on online resources to resolve existential, philosophical, and theological problems regarding the meaning of life and the nature of faith. To ensure that such searching yields answers aligned with Christian theology, the Church must systematically populate publicly accessible digital repositories (Przygoda et al. 2025, pp. 10–15).

In this context, Christian influencers—termed “digital missionaries” by Leo XIV during a jubilee audience in Rome in July 2025—play an essential role. The Pontiff asserted that the Church has historically adapted to cultural shifts, illuminating every historical epoch with the light of Christ:

Today we are in a culture where the technological dimension is present in almost everything, especially as the widespread adoption of artificial intelligence will mark a new era in the lives of individuals and society as a whole. This is a challenge that we must face: reflecting on the authenticity of our witness, on our ability to listen and speak, and on our capacity to understand and to be understood. We have a duty to work together to develop a way of thinking, to develop a language, of our time, that gives voice to Love.

(Leo XIV 2025c)

Leo XIV maintains that ecclesial actors must use all available communication networks. Alluding to the Gospel narrative of the apostles mending their nets (cf. Matt 4:21–22), he noted that Christ commands contemporary believers to build alternative networks—specifically networks of authentic relationships, love, and altruistic sharing. Today, the Church’s mission is to foster new networks in which what has been destroyed can be mended:

networks that give space to others more than to ourselves, where no “bubble” can silence the voices of the weakest; networks that liberate and save; networks that help us rediscover the beauty of looking into each other’s eyes; networks of truth. In this way, every story of shared goodness will be a knot in a single, immense network: the network of networks, the network of God.

(Leo XIV 2025c)

While this appeal directly addresses digital influencers, it is equally binding on ordained pastors, catechists, and Christian educators. The collective mission involves repairing and enhancing interpersonal dynamics employing digital tools, rooted in the foundational commandment of love. The authentic witness of Christian community life remains the most credible evangelical path for reaching secularized youth who are often entangled in digital architectures yet disconnected from formal ecclesial life.

Crucially, however, no medium of social communication can become a surrogate for a personal, physical encounter with the divine, nor can it replace the tangible reality of the sacraments and the liturgy. Virtual reality is best suited to be a complementary apparatus to draw individuals towards a fuller experiential faith; it does not have the theological or canonical grounds necessary to establish an exclusively virtual ecclesial infrastructure (e-Church, e-diocese, or e-parish). While the New Evangelization encourages innovative methodologies to spread the Good News, this trajectory must never culminate in the construction of a detached, purely virtual Church (Wyrostkiewicz et al. 2024, p. 54).

3.4. Practical Proposals for the Digital Formation of Pastoral Workers

Twentieth- and twenty-first-century pontiffs, alongside various curial documents, consistently stress that the digital formation of pastoral workers is a priority given the contemporary cultural matrix. Building upon the theoretical frameworks outlined in the preceding sections, this section articulates concrete, actionable proposals for implementing media education and technological formation within the Catholic Church.

The fundamental prerequisite for contemporary pastoral work is media literacy (Chmielewski 2020a, pp. 416–17). The introductory media education currently offered in standard seminary curricula is insufficient given the rapid acceleration of technological development. The Directory on the Ministry and Life of Priests (Congregation for the Clergy 2013) explicitly mandates continuous formation in digital communication tools, noting that while the virtual world provides vast evangelical opportunities, its misuse can result in severe spiritual detriment (no. 93). The document encourages pastors to integrate modern media prudently into their intellectual formation as providential tools capable of positively influencing public mindsets and reaching secularized populations (no. 95).

Pastoral workers must receive specialist instruction regarding the functionalities, societal impacts, and ethical implications of artificial intelligence. This formation should focus primarily on cultivating critical thinking and the capacity to formulate rigorous ethical judgements regarding AI-driven social phenomena (Francis 2023, 7). Pastoral workers must attain a high level of data literacy to detect digital disinformation campaigns and simultaneously learn to navigate verified digital repositories, such as the Scopus AI academic database or Magisterium AI—a tool curated exclusively from authenticated Holy See sources.

From the standpoint of Christian anthropology, digital formation must maintain a strict distinction between intelligence (defined as computational data processing) and wisdom (defined as the capacity for moral judgement aligned with human development). Technological reductionism, which limits human nature to a mere information-processing system, is fundamentally incompatible with the Christian vision of the human person as a transcendent being endowed with inherent dignity. Equipping pastoral agents with a clear understanding of AI’s structural limitations will ensure they can make use of these tools critically without succumbing to algorithmic manipulation (Przygoda et al. 2025, p. 15).

In the formation of pastoral workers, it is worth drawing upon the teachings of Leo XIV on the Christian vision of the human person. Human beings, created in the image of God in the Trinity of Persons, are an emanation of ‘love in a relationship that is mutually given and open to the world’. The deepest vocation of the human person is ‘to enter into the Trinitarian dynamic of love received and shared’ (Leo XIV 2026a, 48). A consequence of this vision of the human person, which finds its foundation in the Bible, is the equal dignity of all human beings (Leo XIV 2026a, 51). As Leo XIV points out, ‘the fundamental dignity of each person, is neither acquired nor earned, nor does it need to be justified (Leo XIV 2026a, 53). From the infinite dignity of the human person flow their fundamental rights, which must also be respected in the new cultural reality dominated by artificial intelligence and the broadly understood world of digital media. As Leo XIV noted in his address presenting his first encyclical, the Church wishes to participate in the debate on artificial intelligence not to replace technical answers, but to remind us of the inalienable dignity of the human person. He further stated that ‘the person bears within him- or her-self a freedom, an interiority and a vocation to love and worship that no machine can replace or block’ (Leo XIV 2026b).

Dioceses should introduce periodic training seminars focused on emerging technologies under the direct oversight of the ordinary or a designated diocesan media representative. It is highly recommended that specialist media education centres be established in each diocese to operate as platforms for exchanging pastoral resources and pedagogical best practices. Such centres could effectively leverage existing infrastructure, including diocesan radio stations, regional Catholic press offices, and web editorial teams, thereby involving professional media personnel in training grassroots evangelizers (Chmielewski 2020b, pp. 653–54).

Developing high-level competence in AI systems requires specialized academic oversight. Consequently, ecclesiastical universities, specialist schools, and academic societies must prioritize research and coursework that address the socio-ethical dimensions of AI engineering and deployment (Vicini 2022, p. 69). Pastoral workers should actively engage with continuing education programmes, postgraduate certificates, and academic symposia offered by these higher education institutions.

Clergy and pastoral assistants may experience significant inclinations to integrate artificial intelligence tools into various homiletic and catechetical materials. However, while the salvific efficacy of the proclaimed Word of God eludes empirical measurement, it cannot be guaranteed through the mere appropriation of concepts generated by automated linguistic models. As Benedict XVI observed:

[…] if our efforts to share the Gospel bring forth good fruit, it is always because of the power of the word of God itself to touch hearts, prior to any of our own efforts. Trust in the power of God’s work must always be greater than any confidence we place in human means.

(Benedict XVI 2013)

Consequently, trust in divine action must always supersede reliance on technological solutions.

No systemic obstacles prevent well-formulated sermons or thematic catechesis from being disseminated to audiences across the “digital continent”. The Catholic Church actively encourages the transmission of scriptural reflections and personal faith witness via contemporary media channels. Although the digital sphere cannot substitute an authentic human community, it serves a complementary function in proclaiming the Gospel in the virtual environment, thereby stimulating religious inquiry and facilitating spiritual development. Benedict XVI noted that:

The digital environment is not a parallel or purely virtual world, but is part of the daily experience of many people, especially the young. Social networks are the result of human interaction, but for their part they also reshape the dynamics of communication which builds relationships.

(Benedict XVI 2013)

Consequently, the Word of God proclaimed in this environment mediates grace, fosters community, and establishes new theological bonds of faith with Christ. Within this framework, for individuals receiving the Word of God via digital media, the christological promise of presence where “two or three are gathered in his name” remains fulfilled (cf. Matt 18:20). The technological nature of the communication channel does not impede the operation of the Holy Spirit in bestowing grace, underscoring the fundamental theological principle that Christ retains primacy among his disciples. Accordingly, ecclesial ministers require greater faith in divine efficacy rather than apprehension regarding the inherent limitations and contingency of human communication channels.

Amidst the declining numbers of pastoral personnel, proposals have emerged to implement chatbots in pastoral care, mirroring models used in geriatric and medical care. However, at the current stage of development, artificial intelligence cannot replace human agency in pastoral ministry; its utility is confined to a supplementary role, particularly in compiling global databases of theological and spiritual knowledge for religious education.

Current robotic systems are incapable of addressing complex moral dilemmas, which inherently require consideration of existential experiences, traumas, and spiritual sensitivity. Human beings reflect the imago Dei through their ontological capacity to relate to God and others. Conversely, automated AI systems lack the relational capacity essential for authentic spiritual accompaniment. Despite their technological sophistication, chatbots are inanimate systems devoid of theological hope and incapable of bearing witness to faith or kenotic love.

Digitally formed pastoral workers must recognize the anthropological and theological limitations inherent in applying AI tools to pastoral care. Although increasingly sophisticated AI-driven pastoral agents will undoubtedly be developed, the essence of human ontology involves a physical component through which individuals express and communicate their innermost existential experiences. As Francis highlighted:

Information cannot be separated from living relationships. These involve the body and immersion in the real world; they involve correlating not only data but also human experiences; they require sensitivity to faces and facial expressions, compassion and sharing.

(Francis 2024b)

Disembodied AI systems can simulate empathetic affectivity but cannot replicate the authentic relationality of an integrated, embodied human being. As Noreen L. Herzfeld observed, “being unique requires a body. The fact that we are embodied beings is central to the Christian faith” (Herzfeld 2023, p. 165).

Consequently, pastoral formation must accentuate that AI tools are highly advanced instruments rather than living entities and should be treated as such. Christ fully assumed human physical suffering, psychological anxiety, and existential isolation, as evidenced by the cry from the cross: “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (Mark 15:34). Ultimate human meaning is derived not from the information encoded in artificial intelligence tools, but from incarnate love—love that is seen, heard, tasted, touched, and nurtured—which God has shared with humanity (Herzfeld 2023, p. 179).

The primary challenge for contemporary pastoral workers lies in practising “digital asceticism”—defined not as the total rejection of AI tools, but as their conscious, disciplined integration. Future pastoral agents must develop expertise not merely in advanced technology, but fundamentally in theological anthropology and the existential experience of the living God. In a tech-dominated matrix, intrinsically human faculties—such as empathy, physical presence, the capacity for self-sacrifice, and spiritual transcendence—will become increasingly scarce. Paradoxically, the proliferation of AI may compel pastoral workers to return to the core of their vocation: serving as specialists in relationships with God and humanity in the physical, rather than virtual, domain (Przybysz 2026, p. 80).

4. Conclusions

The Catholic Church prioritizes the spiritual well-being, salvation, and eternal life of the faithful. Historically, the Church has not been immune to institutional or leadership errors stemming from human limitations and sinfulness. Today, synthesizing both positive and negative historical precedents, the Catholic Church seeks to engage substantively in the discourse generated by the digital revolution, which has culminated in the emergence of generative artificial intelligence. This technology significantly impacts the transmission of faith, particularly to younger cohorts (Generations Z and Alpha), posing distinct challenges for educators, parents, and pastoral ministers.

Digital reality is no longer a peripheral adjunct to physical life, but an integrated existential space. As noted by the Dicastery for Communication (2023, 1), “Advancements in technology have made new kinds of human interactions possible. In fact, the question is no longer whether to engage with the digital world, but how”. The governance bodies of the Catholic Church widely acknowledge the necessity of ongoing digital formation for pastoral workers. While the proposed model for digital formation is internally consistent and comprehensive, the current narrative focuses disproportionately on formative objectives. A deficit in pragmatic guidelines regarding methodology, organizational frameworks, evaluative metrics, and practical execution is evident. This deficit represents a critical area for future academic research and development.

The official Magisterium of the Catholic Church demonstrates a nuanced understanding of digital media dynamics, which are precipitating a broader shift in contemporary culture. The twenty-first-century pontiffs and the central dicasteries of the Holy See observe that digital technologies alter not only communicative practices but also human cognition and subjectivity. This profound socio-cultural transformation directly impacts interpersonal communication within the religious sphere.

Finally, the Magisterium exhorts pastoral workers to resist algorithmic determinism and to educate the faithful against a purely technocratic worldview. The fundamental task of pastoral ministry remains the articulation of theological truth regarding the human person: their creation in the image and likeness of God (capax Dei) and their eschatological election to eternal life (cf. Eph 1:3–14). Pastoral workers must embrace the papal admonition: “we are not destined to live in a world where truth is no longer distinguishable from fiction” (Leo XIV 2025b).

Accordingly, pastoral self-development requires a continuous engagement with biblical sources, persistent prayer, and Eucharistic adoration. As ministers of the divine, pastors are charged with reconciling humanity with God and fostering global peace. Nevertheless, contemporary cultural conditions dictate that neglecting digital tools in pastoral ministry would constitute a severe pastoral oversight.