In Exodus 34:28, after Moses broke the first set of tablets in anger, God spoke the 10 commandments again, and Moses was tasked with recording them. At this moment, humanity was invited to be a mouthpiece for God through the written word.
This tradition continues today as God tasks Christians to work alongside God to interpret God’s word through the new medium of Artificial Intelligence (AI).
Throughout history, humanity has acquired wisdom through call-and-response. We see this model in the Bible, in our worship liturgy, and in modern teaching models. With AI, there is no call, only response. There is no relationship, no shared learning of wisdom. And it is not always completely accurate. AI can aid ministry in beneficial ways, but it cannot replace spiritual preparation vital to practicing ministry. While there is great temptation to use AI as a substitute for faithful preparation in a profession where burnout is high and time is limited, clergy must continue to uphold the integrity of the pastoral office while also becoming proficient in their understanding and mastery of AI.
At a recent AI task force subgroup meeting, one committee member asked, “What is the Board of Ordained Ministry looking for when it comes to competency to practice ministry?” I think the heart of this question is what is at stake in conversations about clergy and the use of AI. While AI can be a helpful, time-saving tool, pastors need to sit at the bedside without their phones, computers, or tablets and share the love and grace of God. This biblical knowledge and theological understanding of God must be within them. A search engine cannot become the primary interpreter of the Gospel.
This type of effective ministry is called being a “resident theologian,” which is described by Willie E. Hucks II in his article The Pastor as Resident Theologian to include “the often unexpected one-on-one encounter with church members who approach us with their recent musings—desiring solid biblical guidance so they can make sense of their own personal world.”[1]
This means that the clergy person, while not having all the answers, should be able to engage in theological conversations both inside and beyond the walls of the church on demand.
How can we expect pastors to continue practicing ministry in this way when, in his article “Gutenberg’s message to the AI era,” Tom Wheeler shared, “Artificial Intelligence (AI) is the biggest thing since Johannes Gutenberg’s 15th-century movable type printing press”?[2] In their book Click2Save Reboot: The Digital Ministry Bible, Keith Anderson and Elizabeth Drescher explain that, in reference to digital ministry, “Our presence here makes us available to others and points beyond ourselves to the presence of God.”[3] Although Anderson and Drescher discuss practicing digital ministry on social media platforms, I believe their argument also applies to AI. Pastors must be proficient with AI so they can use it ethically as they make God’s presence known to those they minister to. In other words, as another AI sub-team member said, “God is present in the use of AI.”
In her book, The Virtual Body of Christ in a Suffering World, Deanna Thompson shares Jason Byassee’s thoughts that “the Apostle Paul…[had] a primarily virtual presence with the early churches.”[4] He used letters to keep in contact with them, encourage them, and instruct them. In the Methodist tradition, John Wesley also communicated often through letters. UM News reported that, over his lifetime, Wesley is thought to have written more than 18,000 letters, although only 3,300 are documented.[5] This leads me to believe that both Wesley and the Apostle may have used email and other digital tools to further the kingdom of God. However, I am not sure how they would have felt about generative artificial intelligence (GAI). I think they would have been intrigued, but cautious.
What is GAI?
For the purposes of this article, we will reflect more specifically on generative artificial intelligence, which IBM Think describes as “artificial intelligence (AI) that can create original content such as text, images, video, audio, or software code in response to a user’s prompt or request.”[6] While artificial intelligence has been in the background for the past 50 years, an article entitled “The history of AI” explains that generative AI was introduced to the public in 2022 when “OpenAI launched ChatGPT as a free research preview.”[7] Since then, we have all been trying to catch up.
What is the impact of GIA?
A recent survey by Clarivate shared that “Ninety-five percent of college and university students are now using AI for assignments and projects, up from 45 percent in 2024, according to a recent survey of more than 500 graduate and undergraduate students.”[8] Turnitin, a plagiarism detector used by many colleges and universities, reported that “since October 2025, approximately 15% of essay submissions had greater than 80% AI-generated writing, up from an average of 3%2 when Turnitin launched its original version of the AI detector in April 2023.”[9] For our interview processes, we run our papers through iThenticate, which generates an AI report. iThenticate shares that “the overall percentage detected as AI indicates the qualifying text (prose sentences contained in a long-form writing format) within the submitted document that Turnitin’s AI writing detection model determines could be generated by AI or could be generated by AI and could be further modified using an AI paraphraser tool or an AI bypasser tool.”[10] However, unlike a plagiarism report that cites the source of plagiarism, this new AI report and its percentage point to an engine that is vast and, by itself, cannot prove that a candidate used it unethically.
While many UMC conferences have rushed to create and update their plagiarism policies, significant discrepancies remain in how conferences respond to high AI reports. At one conference, ministry candidates are not allowed to interview if their AI percentage report exceeds 10%, while another annual conference asks about high percentages during oral interviews. Another annual conference asks the candidate to write a 500-word disclosure of how they used GIA, including its editing functions. Add those who use translation services with GAI, and the reports are even higher. The Natural Library of Medicine shared that “these generative AI tools are capable of rewriting plagiarized text to evade plagiarism detection…AI-detection tools cannot reliably detect the use of AI in AI-rewritten text.”[11]
So while we have tools to detect GAI as plagiarism, we cannot fully rely on their accuracy right now. That means that while there is a gap in plagiarism detection, we must have conversations about the ethical use of AI and the dangers of unethical use.
Ethical Uses of GAI for Clergy
GAI can be used in constructive ways in ministry. Here are some ways to get started:
- Disclose any GAI used in sermon preparation, meeting notes, research, etc., including editorial GAI like Grammarly. Cite the GAI tools used either verbally or in a bibliography.
- Use GAI for brainstorming. Many of the UMC conferences' AI policies describe this as using GAI as a tool to “aid and not replace.” In your brainstorming, you should also invite the Holy Spirit to stir within you important and pertinent Scripture and stories to share.
- Fact-check any GAI that is used to make sure that what you are sharing is accurate, especially as it pertains to the Bible and theology.
While this list is a great jumping-off point, we must also update “The United Methodist Church Social Principles” to address the economic, environmental, and social impacts of GAI, which are still unfolding.
Unethical Uses of GAI
- Using GAI to write a sermon, Bible study, or interview papers.
- Using GAI to practice pastoral care or counseling.
- Typing personal information about yourself or those you are in ministry with into a chat prompt, as this information may be used in harmful ways.
A helpful touchstone when asking yourself if something is an ethical use of AI is the intention behind using it. Are you using it to help you create something (co-creating) and disclosing it as a source, or are you using it as the sole source and passing it off as your own? The latter is plagiarism. The missing factor here is that co-creation should also take place with the Holy Spirit. Preaching is about sharing God’s story and showing others how it intersects with their lives. Preparing to teach or preach helps pastors connect with God, learn more about God and the Bible, and practice spiritual disciplines that strengthen their faith and ground them so they can lead others.
A Wesleyan Perspective
John Wesley, the founder of the Methodist movement, was wise in how he used tools to spread the Gospel far and care for the poor. For instance, he used his body, moving it beyond the pulpit to the fields to reach more people. In an article on the history of the United Methodist Publishing House, we learn that Wesley devised ways to “distribute books and pamphlets” to those who needed to hear the Gospel.[12] In his article, “John Wesley’s Primitive Physick: An Essay in Appreciation,” C. Wayne Callaway shared that Wesley wrote The Primitive Physick: or an Easy and Natural Method of Curing most Diseases, “born of necessity…making the best of what was available, not advancing the art…”[13] In her article “Technology as a Prudential Means of Grace,” Wendy J. Deichmann made the argument that “John Wesley used the word prudential to describe means of God’s grace that vary necessarily according to circumstances and time. Instead of balking, we might open ourselves to welcome and seize upon the possibilities of technology as a prudential means of grace…”[14] Approaching technology as a “prudential means of grace” continues today as God tasks clergy to work alongside God in interpreting God’s word through the new medium of GAI.[15]
Endnotes
[1] Willie E. Hucks II, “The Pastor as Resident Theologian,” Ministry Magazine, July 2013: https://www.ministrymagazine.org/archive/2013/07/the-pastor-as-resident-theologian.
[2] Tom Wheeler, “Gutenberg’s Message to the AI Era,” Brookings, July 2024, https://www.brookings.edu/articles/gutenbergs-message-to-the-ai-era/.
[3] Keith Anderson and Elizabeth Drescher, Click2Save Reboot: The Digital Ministry Bible (Church Publishing, 2018), 49.
[4] Deanna A. Thompson, The Virtual Body of Christ in a Suffering World (Abingdon Press, 2016), 62.
[5] Sam Hodges, “Scholar Takes His Turn with John Wesley’s Letters,” UM News, August 19, 2014, https://www.umnews.org/en/news/scholar-takes-his-turn-with-john-wesleys-letters.
[6] Cole Stryker and Mark Scapicchio, “What Is Generative AI?, IBM Think, accessed September 5, 2026, https://www.ibm.com/think/topics/generative-ai.
[7] Tim Mucci, Matthew Finio, and Amanda Downie. “The History of Artificial Intelligence,” IBM Think, published October 21, 2024, updated August 19, 2026, https://www.ibm.com/think/topics/history-of-artificial-intelligence.
[8] Matt Enis. “Vast Majority of College Students Now Using AI with Assignments,” Library Journal, August 19, 2026, https://www.libraryjournal.com/story/vast-majority-of-college-students-now-using-ai-with-assignments.
[9] Turnitin, “Turnitin Data Shows Transparency About AI Use Benefits Students and Educators,” February 24, 2026, https://www.turnitin.com/press/turnitin-data-shows-transparency-about-ai-use-benefits-students-and-educators.
[10] iThenticate, “AI writing detection in the Similarity Report,” updated August 26, 2026, https://guides.ithenticate.com/hc/en-us/articles/27835303398541-AI-writing-detection-in-the-Similarity-Report#h_01J2XYT2AX90SCVN0QY1YN7ZTE.
[11] Michaela G. Murdock and Aditya Tadinada, “Can AI Tools Reliably and Effectively Detect Plagiarism in Scientific Writing?” Cureus 17, no. 5 (2025): e83924, https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.83924.
[12] United Methodist Publishing House, “History,” accessed September 5, 2026, https://www.umph.org/Who-Are-We/History.
[13] C. Wayne Callaway, “John Wesley’s Primitive Physick: An Essay in Appreciation,” Mayo Clinic Proceedings 49, no. 5 (May 1974): 318–324, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/4597784/.
[14] Wendy J. Deichmann, “Technology as a Prudential Means of Grace,” October 19, 2020, https://johnwesleyfellows.org/conversations/technology-as-prudential-means-of-grace/.
[15] Deichmann, “Technology as a Prudential Means of Grace.”BibliographyAnderson, Keith, and Elizabeth Drescher. Click2Save Reboot: The Digital Ministry Bible. Church Publishing, 2018.
Bibliography
Callaway, C. Wayne. “John Wesley’s Primitive Physick: An Essay in Appreciation.” Mayo Clinic Proceedings 49, no. 5 (May 1974): 318–324. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/4597784/.
Deichmann, Wendy J. “Technology as a Prudential Means of Grace.” October 19, 2020. https://johnwesleyfellows.org/conversations/technology-as-prudential-means-of-grace/.
Enis, Matt. “Vast Majority of College Students Now Using AI with Assignments.” Library Journal, August 19, 2026. https://www.libraryjournal.com/story/vast-majority-of-college-students-now-using-ai-with-assignments.
Hodges, Sam. “Scholar Takes His Turn with John Wesley’s Letters.” UM News, August 19, 2014. https://www.umnews.org/en/news/scholar-takes-his-turn-with-john-wesleys-letters.
Hucks, Willie E., II. “The Pastor as Resident Theologian.” Ministry Magazine, July 2013. https://www.ministrymagazine.org/archive/2013/07/the-pastor-as-resident-theologian.
iThenticate. “AI Writing Detection in the Similarity Report.” Updated August 26, 2026. https://guides.ithenticate.com/hc/en-us/articles/27835303398541-AI-writing-detection-in-the-Similarity-Report.
Murdock, Michaela G., and Aditya Tadinada. “Can AI Tools Reliably and Effectively Detect Plagiarism in Scientific Writing?” Cureus 17, no. 5 (2025): e83924. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.83924.
Mucci, Tim, Matthew Finio, and Amanda Downie. “The History of Artificial Intelligence.” IBM Think. Published October 21, 2024. Updated August 19, 2026. https://www.ibm.com/think/topics/history-of-artificial-intelligence.
Sryker, Cole, and Mark Scapicchio. “What Is Generative AI?” IBM Think. Accessed September 5, 2026. https://www.ibm.com/think/topics/generative-ai.
Thompson, Deanna A. The Virtual Body of Christ in a Suffering World. Abingdon Press, 2016.Turnitin. “Turnitin Data Shows Transparency About AI Use Benefits Students and Educators.” February 24, 2026. https://www.turnitin.com/press/turnitin-data-shows-transparency-about-ai-use-benefits-students-and-educators.
United Methodist Publishing House. “History.” Accessed September 5, 2026. https://www.umph.org/Who-Are-We/History.
Wheeler, Tom. “Gutenberg’s Message to the AI Era.” Brookings, July 2024. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/gutenbergs-message-to-the-ai-era/.
Jessie Colwell serves as the Director of Clergy Excellence for the Virginia Conference of The United Methodist Church. With 17 years of experience in ministry, Rev. Colwell has served congregations of various sizes and contexts. Her ministry is grounded in a deep commitment to nurturing clergy, strengthening the church, and creating spaces where leaders can grow spiritually, personally, and professionally.
Rev. Colwell is the author of Blessed Wrestling: Biblical Reflections on Discerning God’s Call and co-author of Creation’s Call: A Lenten Guide to Spiritual Renewal. Through her ministry, writing, and leadership, she seeks to help clergy and congregations embrace the sacred work of ministry with courage, authenticity, and hope.