Loyola’s AI faith project starts with young adults’ questions

Listening before designing formation

Loyola University New Orleans is listening to adults in their twenties and early thirties about AI and faith. Its October 13 update (Source: loyno.edu) describes concerns about creativity, work, relationships and identity. Some participants used AI because they feared judgment for gaps in their knowledge.

The university says a $75,000 Lilly Endowment planning grant supported the conversations. A further $2.5 million, five-year application remains conditional; no larger award is announced in this account.

Our practical question for ministry leaders follows from this account: when someone turns to a chatbot, what makes asking another person difficult?

What the project is trying to develop

Loyola’s September 15 announcement (Source: loyno.edu) places the work within the Loyola Institute for Ministry. It describes listening, research and collaboration intended to inform Christian faith formation, drawing on Catholic social teaching and Ignatian discernment. Relationships, personal decision-making and spiritual life are among the areas the institute intends to explore.

For a congregation or campus ministry, the practical implication is to give people room to describe their use before deciding what an AI class should teach. A discussion might begin with an ordinary situation: needing help with a difficult reading, preparing for a conversation, or feeling embarrassed to ask a basic question. Leaders could ask what the tool made easier and what help the person still wanted from someone who knew them.

That approach would also make the ministry’s own responsibilities visible. If asking a question feels like admitting failure, leaders can examine whether their teaching leaves enough room for uncertainty. A group can agree that unfinished questions are welcome and identify a person available for further conversation. Leaders could also return to the conversation after trying a change: do participants now know whom to ask, and do they feel able to disagree or admit confusion? Those questions give a ministry something concrete to examine in its own practice. These are possible responses for readers to consider, not evaluated outcomes of Loyola’s project.

What the account cannot tell us

The update supplies no sample size, recruitment method or full findings. It cannot establish prevalence or causation. Readers should reserve judgment about the proposed program’s effectiveness until there is evidence of what participants experience and learn.