Is AI (Artificial Intelligence) Catholic?

LIke many of my readers, I sometimes play around with different AIs by asking various philosophical and theological questions. Recently, while conducting research for another article on penance in the early Church, I asked three separate AIs (Perplexity AI, Gemini AI, and Chatgpt) the following questions:

Was the method the early church used to address serious sin compatible with the Protestant doctrine of faith alone?
Does this incompatibility with faith alone indicate a break with the bible?
Did the early Christian Church agree more with the Roman Catholic or Protestant view of justification?

Unsurprising (at least to Catholics), each AI answer to the above questions reflects a clear lean towards affirming Catholicism at the expense of Protestantism (with Gemini offering a more “nuanced answer). Now, I see three conclusions as to why these AIs favored the Catholic position over the Protestant one.

Faith alone truly represents the New Testament position on justification and the Church immediately abandoned this position.
Faith alone truly represents the New Testament position on justification but the entire Church misunderstood it for 1600 years.
Faith alone does not represent the New Testament position on justification and the early practice of penance demonstrates an unbroken theological consistency within the Church.

AI Answers

Q. Was the method the early church used to address serious sin compatible with the Protestant doctrine of faith alone?

Perplexity AI

Answer

The early Church’s approach to addressing serious sin was not compatible with the Protestant doctrine of faith alone. The early Christian community held a view that emphasized both faith and works in the process of salvation and reconciliation with God.

Early Church Practices

The early Church Fathers taught that while baptism removed the guilt of original sin, ongoing repentance and confession were necessary to address personal sins. This practice of continual repentance and confession for post-baptismal sins contradicts the Protestant concept of justification by faith alone.

Mortal Sin Concept

The early Church recognized the concept of mortal sin, which could cause a baptized person to lose the grace of salvation. This belief directly conflicts with the Protestant doctrine of sola fide, which asserts that justification is a single act of God based solely on faith.

Works and Salvation

Early Christian teachings emphasized the role of works in eschatological salvation. St. Ambrose, for example, repeatedly stated that works play an important role in the last judgment. This view is incompatible with the Protestant understanding of sola fide, which holds that works are only evidence of faith but do not determine salvation.

The early Church’s approach to serious sin and salvation involved a complex interplay of faith, works, and sacramental practices that does not align with the Protestant doctrine of justification by faith alone.

Q. Does this incompatibility with faith alone indicate a break with the bible?

Gemini AI

Answer

Whether the early church’s practices regarding sin and penance represent a break with the Bible is a complex question that theologians have debated for centuries. There’s no single, universally agreed-upon answer. Here’s a breakdown of the considerations:

Arguments for a Break:

Emphasis on Works: Some argue that the emphasis on penance, particularly the idea that specific works are required for reconciliation, contradicts the New Testament’s emphasis on salvation by grace through faith alone (e.g., Ephesians 2:8-9; Romans 3:28). They would contend that the Bible teaches that faith in Christ is sufficient for justification, and works are a result of that faith, not a means of obtaining or maintaining it.

Legalism: Critics might argue that the system of penance can resemble a form of legalism, where individuals try to earn God’s favor through their own efforts, rather than relying on Christ’s sacrifice. This contrasts with the New Testament’s emphasis on the sufficiency of Christ’s atonement.

Arguments Against a Break (or for a More Nuanced View):

Importance of Repentance: Proponents would argue that the early church’s practices were intended to foster genuine repentance, which is a key element of the Christian faith. They would emphasize that true faith involves a turning away from sin and a desire to live a life pleasing to God. While they might agree that works don’t earn salvation, they are still necessary as evidence of a changed heart.

Discipline and Restoration: They might emphasize the communal aspect of penance, viewing it as a means of discipline and restoration within the church community. The goal was not just individual forgiveness but also the reintegration of the sinner back into fellowship. They would point to passages about church discipline (e.g., Matthew 18:15-17; 1 Corinthians 5) as biblical support for the concept of accountability within the Christian community.

Contextual Understanding: Some scholars argue that we need to understand the early church’s practices within their historical and cultural context. They might argue that the specific forms of penance were less important than the underlying principles of repentance, faith, and restoration. They would emphasize that the Bible doesn’t prescribe a detailed system of penance, allowing for some flexibility in how the church addresses sin.

Focus on Transformation: Advocates might suggest that the early church’s practices, while different from later Protestant formulations, still aimed at the same goal: the transformation of the believer into the likeness of Christ. They would argue that both the early church and the Protestant reformers, despite their different approaches, were ultimately concerned with the outworking of salvation in the life of the believer.

Conclusion:

The relationship between the early church’s practices and the Bible is a matter of interpretation. There are valid arguments on both sides. It’s crucial to consider the historical context, the nuances of biblical teaching, and the different perspectives within Christian theology. Ultimately, each individual and each tradition must wrestle with these questions and arrive at their own conclusions.

Q, Did the early Christian Church agree more with the Roman Catholic or Protestant view of justification?

Chatgpt

Answer

The early Christian church’s views on justification align more closely with the Roman Catholic understanding than with the Protestant doctrine, though there were differences in emphasis and development over time.

Early Church and Justification

The early Christian church, from the first few centuries after Christ, generally held that salvation involved both God’s grace and human response. This is seen in the writings of the Church Fathers such as Augustine, who emphasized that justification (being made right with God) is a gift from God, but also involves a cooperation between divine grace and the individual’s free will. The early church’s understanding of justification was not fully articulated in the way the Roman Catholic or Protestant churches would later define it, but the emphasis was on the necessity of both God’s grace and a transformed life.

For instance:

Grace as Primary: The early church taught that salvation begins with God’s grace—God’s initiative in calling and saving humanity. This was foundational to both Catholic and Orthodox beliefs.

Cooperation with Grace: The early church also emphasized the need for human cooperation with God’s grace. In other words, it was not simply a matter of faith alone, but of turning away from sin and living a life in alignment with God’s will. This concept is more in line with Roman Catholic teaching, which emphasizes the role of sacraments and works in maintaining justification.

Roman Catholic vs. Protestant Views

Roman Catholic View: The Catholic Church teaches that justification is a process that begins with God’s grace, but it also involves human cooperation through faith, works, and the sacraments (such as baptism and penance). Justification is not just a one-time event but an ongoing process, and the church plays a role in administering the means of grace through the sacraments.

Protestant View: In contrast, the Protestant doctrine of sola fide (faith alone) teaches that justification is a one-time, legal declaration by God, where the sinner is counted righteous before God solely through faith in Jesus Christ, apart from any works. For Protestants, good works are a result of faith but do not contribute to justification.

Conclusion

In summary, the early church’s views on justification were more aligned with the Roman Catholic understanding, especially with the emphasis on the need for both grace and human cooperation (through faith and repentance). The Protestant understanding of justification as sola fide (faith alone) marks a significant departure from the early church’s approach, as it emphasizes that justification is entirely by faith and not dependent on works or sacramental acts. The idea of justification by faith alone, as championed by the Reformers like Martin Luther, developed later in response to what they saw as excesses in medieval Catholic theology.

The Findings…

Clearly, given the above evidence, the Protestant doctrine of faith alone appeared late in Church history. Even the more “nuanced” answer given by the Gemini AI presents significant problems for Protestants by placing the faith alone position firmly in the “break” camp. Gemini AI rightly identifies a problem exists, but ultimately leaves it up to “interpretation.” Moreover, for Protestants holding the “faith alone as the New Testament position” on justification, options 1 and 2 remain the only viable explanation for the historical evidence. However, the consequences for such an explanation on the souls of millions of Christians, not to mention doctrines defined by these same Christians (like the Trinity and Incarnation), are dire.

Final Thoughts…

As shown in my interactions with AI, the early Church responded to serious sin committed by Christians in a very Catholic manner. The Church required the sinner to confess, repent, seek absolution from the Church, and do penance. Furthermore, the Church DID NOT respond to serious sin in a manner reflective of a theology grounded in faith alone.

I challenge any Protestant doubting this evidence to conduct their own research and engage with AI.

Below, I offer some useful and enlightening prompts.

Do a mock debate between Martin Luther and St. Hippolytus on serious sin committed after baptism.

Do a mock debate between Martin Luther and St. Vincent of Lirens on Church authority.

Where can I find the earliest Christian reference to the rite of penance?