In recent years, the advent of artificial intelligence has ushered in a new era of technological possibilities, reshaping industries and creative fields alike. Among these developments is the rise of AI-generated art, where sophisticated algorithms produce visual works based on preexisting data and user inputs. This innovation has sparked both excitement and controversy, particularly within the realm of sacred art—a genre traditionally steeped in theological significance and human creativity.
One prominent example of AI’s encroachment into sacred art is the project known as “generation of the sAInts,” where AI-generated images of saints have been created and shared on platforms like Instagram and Reddit. This initiative, led by Julian Ahlquist, a philosophy teacher at Chesterton Academy in Minnesota, and Fr. Timothy Sandquist, former chaplain of the same institution, aims to use AI as a tool for evangelization. Their work has been highlighted in a recent article published by ChurchPop, where both Ahlquist and Fr. Sandquist expressed their belief that AI can be harnessed “for the glory of God” if used wisely and responsibly.1 The article underscores their enthusiasm for AI’s potential to revolutionize the way sacred art is created and disseminated, suggesting that such technology could play a significant role in the New Evangelization.
While the use of technology, including AI, is undeniably vital in the Church’s mission to spread the Gospel in the modern world, the application of AI to the creation of sacred art presents significant philosophical, theological, and ethical challenges that warrant careful consideration. Sacred art is not merely a visual medium; it is an essential expression of the divine, created through the intentionality, creativity, and spiritual depth of human artists. The prospect of AI-generated sacred art raises critical questions about the role of human agency in art, the sacramental nature of sacred imagery, and the ethical implications of delegating such a uniquely human endeavor to machines. What I want to do in this article is briefly explore these concerns, arguing that while AI can be a valuable tool in many areas of evangelization, its use in the creation of sacred art must be approached with caution and discernment.
Sacred Art as a Medium of Transcendence
Sacred art has always been central in the Catholic tradition, serving as a crucial medium through which the divine is communicated to the faithful. From the earliest days of Christianity, visual representations of biblical scenes, saints, and theological concepts have been used to educate, inspire, and elevate the hearts and minds of believers toward God. This tradition finds its roots in the Church’s understanding of art not merely as decoration but as a vehicle for spiritual and theological expression, capable of making the invisible mysteries of the faith tangible and accessible.
To entrust this sacred task to algorithms, however skilled, is to risk losing the personal encounter that sacred art invites.
The Church Fathers and early Christian writers recognized the power of sacred art in fostering a deeper connection with the divine. St. John of Damascus, in his Apologia Against Those Who Decry Holy Images, eloquently defended the use of icons and images in Christian worship. His perspective underscores the incarnational theology at the heart of Catholicism, where the material world is seen as capable of conveying spiritual realities, just as the Word became flesh in the person of Jesus Christ.
The Second Council of Nicaea (787 AD) further solidified the role of sacred images within the Church, declaring that the veneration of icons was not only permissible but necessary for the proper worship of God. The council affirmed that concerning these images, “if anyone does not salute such representations as standing for the Lord and his saints, let him be anathema” (compare with John 11:25; 14:6) and that their images help to lift up the mind to the contemplation of divine things. This was foundational in establishing sacred art as an essential element of Catholic worship and devotion, providing a means for the faithful to encounter the divine mysteries in a visible and accessible form.
In more recent times, the Second Vatican Council reaffirmed the importance of sacred art in its constitution Sacrosanctum Concilium. The Catechism, quoting Sacrosanctum Concilium, states that “the fine arts, but above all sacred art, ‘of their nature are directed toward expressing in some way the infinite beauty of God’” (CCC 2513) and that sacred art has the unique ability of “turning men’s minds devoutly toward God” (SC 122). This drives the careful preservation and promotion of sacred art within the Church, recognizing its vital role in the liturgy and the spiritual life of the faithful.
What emerges from these theological reflections is a recognition of sacred art as more than just an aesthetic endeavor; it is a participatory act in the divine economy, where the artist, inspired by grace, becomes a co-creator with God. The incarnational aspect of sacred art—its ability to present the realities of faith through material forms—highlights the unique relationship between human creativity and divine revelation. Sacred art, therefore, is not merely a product of human skill but a manifestation of divine truth, capable of drawing the viewer into a richer communion with God.
Human Creativity and the Imago Dei
The rich tradition of sacred art in the Catholic Church is inexorably entangled with the theological concept of imago Dei—the belief that human beings are created in the image and likeness of God. This doctrine, rooted in the book of Genesis, asserts that humans, unlike any other creature, reflect God’s creative power and rationality. The capacity for creativity is a direct manifestation of this divine image, making human artistry not merely an act of aesthetic production but a profound participation in God’s ongoing creative work.
Therefore, sacred art is about more than just producing visually pleasing images. It necessarily involves intentional engagement with the mysteries of the faith, translating spiritual truths into tangible forms that can inspire and elevate the viewer. This creative act is inherently human—rooted in the artist’s capacity for reason, imagination, and moral judgment, all of which are aspects of the imago Dei. The creation of sacred art is an act of worship, where the artist collaborates with divine grace to produce works that serve as conduits of God’s presence in the world. In contrast, despite its technical sophistication, AI-generated art lacks this intrinsic connection to the divine. While AI can mimic artistic styles and generate visually compelling images, it operates on algorithms and data processing, devoid of the spiritual intentionality and moral reasoning that characterize human creativity. Bernard Lonergan’s theory of intentional consciousness provides a valuable framework for understanding this distinction. According to Lonergan, human cognition involves a dynamic process of experiencing, understanding, judging, and deciding, which are essential for authentic creative acts. These capacities are grounded in self-awareness, intentionality, and pursuit of the good—qualities that are uniquely human and cannot be replicated by machines.
Taking this approach highlights the limitations of AI in the realm of sacred art. While AI can produce images that are aesthetically similar to human-created art, it cannot engage in the deeper, spiritual process that defines true sacred art. The intentionality behind sacred art involves more than just selecting colors and shapes; it requires an understanding of theological truths and a desire to express these truths in a way that honors God and edifies the faithful. This spiritual depth is what gives sacred art its power to transcend mere aesthetics and become a medium of divine grace.
The creation of sacred art is an act of worship, where the artist collaborates with divine grace to produce works that serve as conduits of God’s presence in the world.
Emergent Probability and the Irreducibility of Human Artistry
Bernard Lonergan’s concept of emergent probability offers a grounded critique of the deterministic and reductionist assumptions that often underpin AI-generated art. Emergent probability is a framework that explains how complex systems and higher levels of order arise from the interaction of simpler elements, not through a predetermined path, but through a dynamic and probabilistic process. In the context of human artistry, this concept suggests that true sacred art emerges from the intricate interplay of human experience, insight, and spiritual intentionality—elements that cannot be reduced to mere computation.
Human artistry, especially in creating sacred art, is an act of intellectual and spiritual engagement. It involves the artist’s personal experiences, cultural background, and theological understanding, all of which converge to create a work that transcends its material components. This creation process is inherently probabilistic, meaning it is shaped by various factors, including the artist’s inspiration, choices, and even limitations, which give rise to something uniquely beautiful and meaningful. This contrasts sharply with AI-generated art, where the creation process is governed by algorithms designed to predict and replicate patterns based on vast datasets. While AI can produce aesthetically pleasing images, it does so without the emergent complexity that characterizes human creativity. The art it produces is not the result of a deeply personal or spiritual journey but rather the output of predefined computational processes.
By reducing art to an algorithmic process, AI-generated works risk missing the insights and intentionality that are essential to sacred art. Sacred art, as an expression of faith and devotion, cannot be fully understood or appreciated if it is stripped of the spiritual and experiential depth that human artists bring to their work. The uniqueness of human creativity, according to Lonergan, lies in its capacity to transcend mere functionality, tapping into the deeper realms of human consciousness and spiritual insight. AI, lacking these capabilities, can only imitate the surface qualities of art, without engaging with the deeper, emergent processes that make art genuinely sacred.
Technodeterminism and the Danger of Depersonalization
In the contemporary discourse on technology, particularly concerning AI, there is a prevailing narrative of technodeterminism—the belief that technological progress is an inevitable and predominantly beneficial force shaping society. This perspective often frames AI-generated art as a natural and positive evolution in the creative process, suggesting that the use of AI in sacred art is merely the next step in integrating technology into religious practices. However, this narrative overlooks the significant dangers of depersonalization inherent in substituting human creativity with machine-generated outputs.
Human artistry, especially in creating sacred art, is an act of intellectual and spiritual engagement.
Sacred art has always been a deeply personal expression of faith, rooted in the artist’s relationship with God and their desire to communicate spiritual truths to others. By reducing the creation of sacred art to a product of machine learning, this narrative risks stripping away the personal and spiritual dimensions that make sacred art so powerful. Art becomes less about expressing human spirituality and more about manipulating algorithms to produce visually appealing images.
This shift towards depersonalization not only diminishes the artist’s role but also impacts the viewer’s experience of sacred art. When a human artist creates sacred art, it carries with it the artist’s personal insight, emotional depth, and spiritual struggle—elements that invite the viewer into a deeper contemplation of the divine. AI-generated art, by contrast, lacks these qualities. It may evoke a certain aesthetic response, but it does not invite the same level of engagement or reflection because it is not the product of a human soul striving to connect with God. The viewer is thus deprived of the opportunity to encounter the divine through the artist’s personal journey of faith.
Thus, the technodeterministic narrative, aside from being reductionistic, can lead to an uncritical acceptance of AI-generated art, as if its production is an inevitable and even desirable development. This mindset can diminish the value of human agency in the creation of art, reducing the artist’s role to that of a mere operator of technology rather than a co-creator with God. The depersonalization of sacred art in this context is not just a loss of individual expression but also a theological issue. When sacred art is reduced to algorithmic processes, it loses its capacity to convey the personal encounter with the divine that is central to its purpose. The danger here is that the art becomes more about the efficiency and capability of the technology rather than the spiritual and communal act of creation that involves prayer, reflection, and a deep connection with God.
Theologically, this shift risks undermining the incarnational nature of sacred art. In Catholic teaching, the Incarnation is the ultimate expression of God’s intimate involvement with the material world. Sacred art participates in this incarnational mystery by making visible the invisible realities of faith, through the hands and hearts of human artists who are themselves images of God. Technodeterminism, by prioritizing technological prowess over human creativity, fails to honor this incarnational aspect, instead treating art as a product to be optimized rather than a spiritual gift to be cultivated.
In the quiet spaces of our churches, where light falls gently on painted icons and carved statues, we encounter the divine not just in what we see, but in what we feel. These creations are more than images; they are vessels of grace, borne from the heart and soul of artists who, in their humble craft, reflect the image of the Creator. To entrust this sacred task to algorithms, however skilled, is to risk losing the personal encounter that sacred art invites. The spiritual depth, the communal resonance, and the incarnational mystery chiseled into each piece cannot be replicated by machines. Because of this, we shouldn’t lose sight of the reality that sacred art is not merely to be seen but to be prayed, felt, and lived, part of the “kneeling theology” that Balthasar promulgated.2 It is a bridge between heaven and earth, a testament to the divine spark within us all—something that no machine, however advanced, can ever truly replicate.
1 Compare the responsible use of AI with what I have previously written here: https://www.wordonfire.org/articles/navigating-ai-with-lonergans-transcendental-precepts/
2 “Hans Urs von Balthasar, as he once put it, wants ‘a kneeling, not a sitting theology.’ Basically, theology is ‘adoration and sanctity, or love of God and neighbor,’ even if, as he admits, ‘between these two poles something is inserted that can be called a theoretical concern with the Word’.” Jakob Laubach, “Hans Urs von Balthasar,” Theologians of Our Time, ed. Leonhard Reinisch (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 1964), 146-147.