Lambeth conference asks what faith communities can contribute to citizen AI literacy

A policy brief still to be written

A conference at Lambeth Palace on November 16–17 will ask what faith communities can contribute to citizens’ technological literacy and ability to make their own choices. The University of Bath ART-AI programme proposes a second-day workshop to develop a policy brief with delivery recommendations. Registration has closed.

The event, AI, Ethics and Faith after Magnifica Humanitas, places discussion of Pope Leo XIV’s encyclical alongside an interfaith programme. The organisers describe intended alignment with the G20 Interfaith20 2026 recommendations and the UK’s Roadmap for Modern Digital Government. That is their stated ambition, not evidence of government endorsement or an adopted policy. Source: cdt-art-ai.ac.uk

Bath’s account of its January 20 gathering records an earlier meeting at Lambeth Palace involving Christian, Jewish and Muslim perspectives. The November workshop continues that conversation with a more specific proposed output: recommendations about citizens’ capabilities. Source: cdt-art-ai.ac.uk

Literacy includes deciding when to stop

The relevant Christian context is educational, not simply technological. In paragraph 140 of Magnifica Humanitas, dated May 15, Leo describes education as patient engagement with reality and says learning about AI includes deciding when and for what purposes it should not be used. The surrounding discussion connects education with seeking truth and sustaining judgment. These are the encyclical’s principles, not findings from a tested literacy course. Source: vatican.va

For faith-community educators, that distinction suggests a useful question: can a participant act independently after the demonstration ends? Knowing how to ask a chatbot for information is one skill. Knowing where to verify its answer, and when to seek a person instead, is another.

A contribution communities could make

Consider a hypothetical community workshop on finding a local public service. Participants could compare an AI-generated explanation with the service’s own current information, identify missing details and locate a human contact. The aim would be to practise finding a reliable route forward, without entering anyone’s personal circumstances into a chatbot.

A church or interfaith learning group could record which steps participants found difficult and what assistance they needed. That would give a policy discussion something more concrete than a general call for awareness: examples of the capabilities a course should teach and the barriers its delivery must address. This is AI Faith Monitor’s suggested exercise, not a conference recommendation or a claim that volunteers can replace specialist advice.

The programme page does not state a publication date; November 13 is this report’s verification date. This advance brief draws on published materials, not attendance, interviews or a completed policy brief. Whether the workshop produces usable recommendations remains unestablished.