Pledge Against AI Catholic Content and Text (PAACCT)

By Catholic Culture ( articles - email ) | Oct 07, 2026

Editor’s note: The Pledge Against AI Catholic Content and Text (PAACCT) is an initiative inviting Catholic institutions, writers, editors, artists, and media producers to stand together to uphold the essential human activities of thought and communication against the ongoing attempt to replace them with so-called artificial intelligence. By making a public commitment to eschew certain uses of AI and to use it otherwise responsibly and honestly, the signatories practice transparency in their own work and set a standard for Catholic use and non-use of AI in accord with the Church’s understanding of the person, society, and culture, following the lead of Pope Leo XIV.

This page consists of a preamble, the pledge itself, the “conditions and clarifications” (answering questions about specific AI uses allowed or prohibited under the pledge), and the current list of signatories.

To jump down to the list of signatories, click here.

It is not too late to sign the PAACCT! We will continue to add new signatories over time. Those who wish to sign, whether on behalf of an institution or as an individual, may, after reading this whole page, fill out the PAACCT application form.

—Thomas Mirus, Editor-in-Chief of Catholic Culture and President of Trinity Communications

Preamble

In his encyclical Magnifica Humanitas, Pope Leo XIV wrote of so-called artificial intelligence:

We must avoid the misconception of equating this type of ‘intelligence’ with that of human beings. These systems merely imitate certain functions of human intelligence. In doing so, they often surpass human intelligence in speed and computational capacity, offering tangible benefits across many fields. Yet this power remains entirely tied to data processing. So-called artificial intelligences do not undergo experiences, do not possess a body, do not feel joy or pain, do not mature through relationships and do not know from within what love, work, friendship or responsibility mean. Nor do they have a moral conscience, since they do not judge good and evil, grasp the ultimate meaning of situations, or bear responsibility for consequences. They may imitate language, behavior and analytical skills, or even simulate empathy and understanding, but they do not understand what they produce, for they lack the affective, relational and spiritual perspective through which human beings grow in wisdom. Even when these tools are described as capable of ‘learning,’ their way of doing so is different from that of a human person. It is not the experience of those who allow themselves to be shaped by life and grow over time through choices, mistakes, forgiveness and fidelity. Rather, it is a form of statistical adaptation based on data and feedback, which can be very effective, but does not imply inner growth. (Magnifica Humanitas 99)

To treat AI as though it were intelligent in itself, or to use it to simulate thought and creativity, is an abdication of one’s essential human capacities and vocation, a form of “burying the talents we have been given to grow as individuals in relation to God and others” (Pope Leo XIV, Message for the 60th World Day of Social Communications). It is indirectly disrespectful to the image of God in His rational creatures.

In an attempt to defend AI-generated writing, some say: “I had the thought myself—I just got the AI to express it for me.” But the expression of thought in words and even the ordering of paragraphs into a logical structure is part of the very process of understanding, not merely an external product of it. On this point, St. John Henry Newman wrote: “Thought and speech are inseparable from each other. Matter and expression are parts of one: style is a thinking out into language.” He disparaged those who “speak as if one man could do the thought, and another the style….as if language were the hired servant, the mere mistress of the reason, and not the lawful wife in her own house.” Further, he said, “since the thoughts and reasonings of an author have…a personal character, no wonder that his style is not only the image of his subject, but of his mind” (Newman, “Literature,” The Idea of a University).

Therefore, “Communication is more than the expression of ideas and the indication of emotion. At its most profound level it is the giving of self in love” (Pontifical Council for Social Communications, Pastoral Instruction Communio et Progressio, 11). Communication is communion. To delegate one’s communication to a large language model is to withhold oneself, to refuse to risk oneself, and this is in bad faith insofar as one expects the recipient to bring himself, his time, and his effort to something which no self took the time and effort to create. Instead of the true community of self-gift between minds to which every human person is ordered and entitled, the reader or audience is presented with a simulacrum, “turning people into passive consumers of unthought thoughts and anonymous products without ownership or love”:

By simulating human voices and faces, wisdom and knowledge, consciousness and responsibility, empathy and friendship, the systems known as artificial intelligence not only interfere with information ecosystems, but also encroach upon the deepest level of communication, that of human relationships. (Leo XIV, Message for the 60th World Day of Social Communications)

As for artistic production more generally, “we urgently need to distinguish human art from what is produced by machines. There is an ontological difference—even before an aesthetic one—between art and what a machine can generate through statistical calculation based on millions of images created by others” (Pope Leo XIV, Address to Artists and Curators, Oct. 2, 2026). The making of art is inherently spiritual (that is, a process of the intellect in receptivity and act) and personal. As with writing, its personal character is not reducible to a broad “idea” which one has and then uses to prompt AI; rather, the artist’s idea extends to his intention of every detail of the work, its whole and parts all imbued with his intelligence.

The making of sacred art in particular ought to be a form of prayer. Since AI cannot understand, love, or interiorly intend what it depicts, it is inappropriate to use it to produce religious images. This is not merely because of the visible outcome, but because divine worship comes properly and integrally from souls made in the image of the divine, prompted by grace: “God is spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth” (John 4:24). Likewise, the saints are properly honored by those who share with them in the life of grace. Thus generative AI is categorically incapable of giving due reverence to Christ and His saints.

Since AI is parasitical on the products of human creativity, it presents ethical problems of plagiarism. But it also floods the digital market with “slop” which drowns out the very human sources it depends on, making it harder for even savvy consumers to find real human work: see the increasing predominance of AI pages in search engine results, or of AI-generated books on Amazon.

While there are advantages to using AI in the process of research, there are also serious dangers, such as AI’s use of unreliable sources (perhaps themselves AI-derived), and even outright fabrication or “hallucination.” Use of AI for research without careful corroboration can lead to the promotion of false information, which may even be theologically erroneous or damaging to another’s reputation.

Finally:

Public trust is earned by accuracy and transparency… Content generated or manipulated by AI are to be clearly marked and distinguished from content created by humans. The authorship and sovereign ownership of the work of journalists and other content creators must be protected. (Leo XIV, Message for the 60th World Day of Social Communications)

The Pledge Against AI Catholic Content and Text (PAACCT)

As a Catholic writer, publisher, editor, artist, and/or media producer, I represent the Church through my work in accordance with my state in life and canonical status. It is my obligation to maintain integrity in my work and in my relations with my audience and colleagues so that the Gospel of Our Lord Jesus Christ and His holy Catholic Church may not be mistrusted on my account. I alone am responsible for what I publish and promote, unless subject in this matter to another authority, whether natural, ecclesiastical, or professional.

Given the inherent harm of the use of artificial “intelligence” to substitute for human thought, conversation, creativity, and expression, and the potential harms of even its more limited use as a background tool in the production of digital and written material, I have a duty to use AI in a responsible and honest way if I choose to use it at all.

Given these considerations, and in line with the exhortations of Pope Leo XIV, I hereby declare the following with respect to the use of AI for the production of digital and written media which I control as an individual creator, editor, or publisher.

I will never intentionally use or allow the use of generative “artificial intelligence” as a direct means of the creation or substantial positive material modification of text presented as original thought. I will not publish AI-generated text, unless as a quotation (itself properly cited and documented) for clearly indicated and obviously appropriate rhetorical purposes.

Nor will I ever use generative AI in video or audio material unless the material is clearly marked as being so generated or modified, even if I think no reasonable person would mistake it as being completely genuine. (See the Conditions and Clarifications below for more detail on what this and the previous paragraph do and do not forbid.)

I will not use AI to generate images of God or the saints.

I will verify that any and all research data provided by AI engines is corroborated by non-AI-compromised sources if I make positive use of that information in my published work.

I make these resolutions for the sake of God and His Church as a firm commitment which stands until publicly withdrawn.

Conditions and Clarifications

The Pledge Against AI Catholic Content and Text (PAACCT) is an affirmation of a commitment to avoid the use of AI to simulate or replace activities and productions of thought and creativity, as well as the materially dishonest use of AI in visual, audio, and written works. The PAACCT is not a vow or an oath in the proper moral senses, nor should it be seen as binding under pain of sin by its own power.>

The PAACCT is a statement by Catholics subject to the authority of Pope Leo XIV, the Church’s magisterium, and all other legitimate ecclesiastical authorities. Individuals or institutions which publicly attack the teachings of the Church or promote schism or sedition against Church authorities may be rejected or removed from the public list of signatories at the discretion of Catholic Culture without warning, notice, or explanation.

An institution or person’s appearance on this list does not constitute an endorsement of the other institutions and persons who have signed the PAACCT, only of the content of the PAACCT itself.

The PAACCT functions as an honor system. There is no systematic “enforcement” or auditing by Catholic Culture, Trinity Communications, or anyone affiliated with them. Notorious violators of the PAACCT may be removed at will by Catholic Culture from the public list of signatories. There is no public list of signatures removed or rejected from the PAACCT.

Editors and others who sign the PAACCT on behalf of their entire institution are committing to holding their authors, artists, and producers to the rules of the PAACCT. Institutions should have their own AI policies and, when appropriate, should put submissions through a reliable AI-detection system such as Pangram, though it is acknowledged that there may be no completely foolproof way to exclude all AI-modified material. If they find in retrospect that they have unknowingly published writing generated or modified by AI, they should withdraw the material from publication and, if appropriate, acknowledge the error publicly. Writers who use a large language model to detect typographical errors should save their logs, so that if an editor asks, they can prove that they did not use the LLM to compose or substantially modify their work.

“Artificial intelligence” is a broad category comprising an unclearly demarcated group of technologies. However, the kind of automated services which have been popular for decades are not to be considered AI for the purposes of the PAACCT. These include technologies/systems which do spellchecking and grammar correction, automated “fixing” for color grading, sound mixing, and similar tools. Traditional CGI is not considered AI, nor is green-screen imagery unless the background is made up of AI-generated images.

In forbidding the direct and positive use of generative AI, the PAACCT does not forbid the use of AI as a mechanism to stimulate one’s own thoughts, brainstorm ideas, do preliminary research, or otherwise make anything which is not itself ultimately presented to an audience. It does not forbid the arrangement of basic data points or human-written material for organizational purposes (such as writing descriptions for YouTube videos), nor does it include brainstorming/generating titles for SEO purposes.

As exceptions to the general rule against using AI to generate text, the PAACCT does not forbid the use of AI in the process of translation (though serious caution is urged), for strictly technical writing (such as a user’s manual for a product), or in statistical work (so long as data are carefully verified and the interpretation of data is not simply delegated to AI).

The PAACCT does not forbid AI-generated thumbnails, AI backgrounds for videos, or even memes, but these (if realistic) should be labeled as AI-generated in the video description or in some other conspicuous way, and they should not include AI-generated images of God or the saints. The use of AI to speak a human-written script in a video or audiobook is not forbidden, though this should be labeled. However, the PAACCT forbids using AI to write dialogue, commentary, or narration for a video or podcast.

The PAACCT does not forbid the use of AI for transcription, podcast editing, or “cuts” (making clips, shorts, or other appropriations of one’s own original material). Such use does not need to be labeled.

AI-generated comments or direct messages (i.e. for social media marketing) require a label. AI chatbots must be labeled as such.

Labeling of AI-generated material should be conspicuous. However, it need not be a focal point or emphasis.

The PAACCT regards material destined for public consumption. It does not include personal notes or internal communications of a company or group, i.e. a PowerPoint presentation or summary report meant only for or primarily for team members, even if such a document might theoretically be publicly accessible.

Reposting AI-generated material is not subject to the PAACCT, though it is discouraged.

Other fringe cases and ambiguities may exist, but should be navigated according to the spirit of the PAACCT.

Signatories

This list will continue to be updated over time. If you wish to sign, fill out the PAACCT application form.

Institutions:

Catholic Culture

Catholic World Report

Wiseblood Books

Humanum Review, Quarterly Review of the John Paul II Institute

MFA Program in Creative Writing, University of Saint Thomas, Houston

The Colosseum

Dappled Things

Individuals:

Phil Lawler, journalist and founder of Catholic World News

Matthew Levering, James N. Jr. and Mary D. Perry Chair of Theology, Mundelein Seminary

John C. Cavadini, Professor of Theology, University of Notre Dame

James Matthew Wilson, poet and Director of the MFA Program in Creative Writing, University of Saint Thomas, Houston

Edward Feser, Professor of Philosophy, Pasadena City College

D.C. Schindler, Professor of Metaphysics and Anthropology, Pontifical John Paul II Institute

Erick Ybarra, author and YouTuber

Katy Carl, writer in residence, University of St. Thomas, Houston

Larry Chapp, retired professor of theology, DeSales University

R.J. Snell, Director of Academic Programs, The Witherspoon Institute

J. Budziszewski, Emeritus Professor of Government, Philosophy, and Civic Leadership, University of Texas at Austin

Emily Stimpson Chapman, author

Amy Welborn, author

Trevor Cribben Merrill, novelist