The storm over AI use among Catholic commentators refuses to die down. However, because so-called artificial intelligence is still a relatively new technology, the issue is not necessarily black and white.
True, there are many benefits that writers can capitalize on by employing the technology. These include — but are not limited to — research, translating texts, transcribing audio, sharpening and making images, checking spelling and grammar, and creating graphics to complement written work.
But even with these legitimate and ethical uses of AI, certain pitfalls remain. AI-generated information still needs to be vigorously fact-checked and quotations can be inaccurate as a result of the technology’s attempts to avoid reproducing copyrighted material, to name but two concerns.
The ongoing controversy in Catholic circles, though, concerns something else entirely: using AI not as a tool to support the writing process, but as the primary means of producing materials with little or no human input beyond the creation of prompts.
Support independent Traditional Catholic journalism: Donate to Integrity today!
While this has become commonplace on Substack, X, and other social media platforms, larger, more established publications also appear to be issuing articles from time to time that appear to have been generated by AI.
Two popular Catholic commentators who have, unfortunately, become associated with this practice more than others are Chris Jackson (who uses a pseudonym) and Mark Lambert.
Analyzing ‘Chris Jackson’
Social media users became suspicious of Jackson more so than in the past when Substack introduced AI detection software in July. After it was made available, Jackson chose to disable it for his posts.
To his critics, this was akin to a heroine addict refusing a drug test, as they could see no other reason for turning off the feature than to conceal the use of AI.
Co-host Rob on the Avoiding Babylon podcast was among the first to point out the development, noting on X that “‘Chris Jackson’ learned his lesson after Substack showed that his article from yesterday was 78% AI.”
Louie Verrecchio of AKACatholic noticed the same phenomenon with Jackson, who has now been nicknamed “Chris GPT” by social media users. “The issue in this case isn’t so much the use of an AI tool, per se, it’s the fakery, the dishonesty, the deception, the idea that AI content is almost assuredly being misrepresented (and in some sense, sold) as one’s own proprietary independent analysis,” Verrechio has rightly argued.
Others have drawn attention to the fact that running some of Jackson’s articles through AI detection software returned results indicating that they were 100 percent AI-generated.
Integrity co-founder Stephen Kokx also recognized that over a six-day period from October 8-13, Jackson produced 9 essays totaling just under a whopping 20,000 words, which places him on course for over 1 million written words over the next year, an astronomical level of output that few human beings have ever accomplished.
“Chris Jackson of @BigModernism is the most prolific blogger in history,” Kokx sarcastically remarked on X, while warning his readers about Jackson’s largely unhelpful “Trad outrage” content that doesn’t combat the main errors of the contemporary age: Liberalism, Americanism, Zionism, and the like.
For the sake of fairness, it must be said that legitimate concerns have been raised about the reliability of AI detection software, though the consistency of results from different software about Jackson’s work indicate the writing is undoubtedly heavily AI-assisted.
The Dispatch
It is curious, though, why Jackson, who previously contributed to The Remnant newspaper and other traditional Catholic publications pre-AI, would resort to turning off the AI detection on his Substack. Several long-time readers of his work, including many of his critics, previously praised him as a competent writer with a sharp sense of humor and keen observational skills.
Jackson has not denied the accusations and even recently mounted a defense of his use of AI. In an article addressing criticism from Anthony Abbate of the Avoiding Babylon show, Jackson argued that the crisis in the Church demands a swift response from those defending the Faith, making AI an indispensable tool.
“The news arrives like water through a broken fire hydrant,” said Jackson. “An independent Catholic writer attempting to document and analyze these developments faces a genuine problem of time. Why spend four hours laboriously constructing a first draft when technology can help produce one in minutes, leaving more time to examine sources, refine arguments, correct errors, and publish while the story remains current,” he argued, before declaring that AI was “an enormous advantage.”
Jackson did concede, however, that AI slop exists, pointing the finger at another figure whose name keeps cropping up in the controversy: Mark Lambert.
Lambert’s case is equally perplexing. Whether one agrees with his views or not, he has long been a writer and commentator whom many have regarded as a respectable player in the Catholic commentary milieu. He, too, is not short of original views and opinions.
Why, then, has he recently begun publishing work that appears to be 100 percent AI-generated? Dr. Naveen Maliakkal has repeatedly put his essays through programs that suggest even his shorter responses to X critics are drafted by computers. “Yes [sic] some posts I use AI to generate, check information, wording etc.,” Lambert admitted when confronted.
Part of the answer might lie with the audience. Whenever Jackson and Lambert have been criticized, many of their readers and supporters have rushed to their defense. Some have stated outright that they do not care how the articles are produced, only what they say. The underlying argument seems to be that, if I agree with the content, then how the creator was able to get it on my screen is of little importance. This, then, becomes a trap for the writer and creates a vicious closed-loop circle.
Interestingly, this relationship between audiences and creators appears to have a generational dimension, seemingly being more prevalent among Baby Boomers and Generation X. Discerning young Catholics on the other hand, appear to be setting higher standards.
Gen Z against AI use
Christian Bergsma, a 26-year-old Integrity Magazine contributor and a highly respected Catholic thinker, writer, and commentator in his own right, recently addressed the issue on his Catholicism & Creation livestream. Bergsma was particularly scathing in his criticism of the growing reliance on AI among older Catholic commentators, arguing that younger generations have a better understanding of the technology’s proper role.
“Kids know how to use AI as like a tool … not as a medium in and of itself, but as a tool to supplement different media,” he observed.
He also singled out Lambert, accusing him of flooding X with lengthy, uninspiring AI-generated posts. “It’s all boring prose, prosaically boring. It’s 100 percent AI,” Bergsma said.
Bergsma also did not spare Jackson, whose apparent abandonment of his own writing talents he described as a tragedy. “I can remember when Chris Jackson was actually writing really funny and interesting stuff,” he recalled, citing Jackson’s witty review of Pope Francis’s Laudato Si’ as an example. “The guy can actually write well. He can be funny,” Bergsma continued, lamenting that Jackson now produces an extraordinary volume of articles that he believes are largely AI-generated.
Bergsma further criticized the trend for sacrificing originality, humor, and genuine intellectual engagement in favor of sheer volume. Jackson is “choosing to write slop and push slop on us,” he critiqued. “If you don’t have that much time, just don’t write as much. Just write something short, but write something good.”
With the overwhelming choir of voices addressing exactly the same issues, Jackson and Lambert should perhaps reconsider their methods, especially given that passing off something not your own is a form of lying. Readers follow specific commentators because of their distinctive insights, personalities, and unique writing styles. Both Jackson and Lambert have been blessed by God in all three of these departments, so why outsource it to a machine?
