Taking visions with ChatGPT
------------------------------------------------------------------
## Artificial intelligence has some good things to say,
surprisingly, but it is by no means perfect. But it can be a useful
tool (or a "mirror") to help clarify my thoughts.

March 21, 2023

Me: What would a church look and feel like if its membership is
predominantly autistic or neurodiverse, and its pastors and
congregational leadership also are predominantly occupied by
autistic folks? What sort of things would be different from typical
Protestant churches, in terms of polity or governance, how worship
services operate, and environmental designs in general?

ChatGPT: A church that is predominantly autistic or neurodiverse,
with autistic pastors and leadership, would likely have a different
approach to polity or governance, worship services, and
environmental designs than typical Protestant churches. Here are
some possible differences:

Polity or governance:

Autistic or neurodiverse leadership might be more likely to
approach church governance in a more structured, logical, and
systematic way, with clear rules and procedures. They may prefer
written policies and procedures, as well as clear job descriptions
and accountability measures. They may also be more likely to use
technology to facilitate communication and decision-making, such as
online forums or email lists.

Worship services:

Worship services in an autistic or neurodiverse church might be
designed to accommodate the sensory needs of the congregation. This
might include using visual aids such as PowerPoint slides or videos
to supplement spoken or sung words, providing fidget toys or other
sensory tools for people who need them, and avoiding sensory
overload triggers such as loud music or bright flashing lights.
Worship services might also include more structured and predictable
routines, with clear expectations and guidelines for behavior.

Environmental designs:

The physical environment of an autistic or neurodiverse church
might be designed to minimize sensory overload and accommodate
different communication styles. This might include using soft
lighting, muted colors, and sound-absorbing materials to create a
calming and welcoming atmosphere. Furniture and layout might be
arranged in a way that accommodates different sensory needs and
allows for more flexible movement and seating options. Signage
might be clear and consistent, with pictorial or written cues to
help people navigate the space.

Overall, a church that is predominantly autistic or neurodiverse,
with autistic pastors and leadership, would likely place a high
value on clear communication, structured routines, and
accommodations for sensory needs. They may also be more likely to
embrace new technologies and approaches to governance that are more
systematic and logical.

Me: Many autistic congregants may find formalities, complex
religious and social conventions, and rigid organizational
structures off-putting and anxiety-inducing, however. How do you
find a point of balance there? Would a large congregation with
traditional worship services serve this population better, or
should we consider a network of microchurches with a rather
unconventional approach to doing church?

ChatGPT: You make an important point that many autistic congregants
may find formalities, complex religious and social conventions, and
rigid organizational structures off-putting and anxiety-inducing.
Therefore, finding a point of balance that meets the needs of both
the neurodiverse congregation and the traditional aspects of a
church may be challenging, but it is possible.

One approach could be to create a hybrid model of worship services
that incorporates some traditional elements but also allows for
more flexibility and creativity. For example, the service could
include traditional hymns and readings but also provide space for
non-traditional forms of expression such as dance, art, or poetry.
The structure of the service could also be adapted to include more
breaks or opportunities for quiet reflection or sensory regulation.

Alternatively, a network of microchurches with an unconventional
approach to doing church could also be a good option for the
neurodiverse population. These microchurches could be smaller in
size and allow for more personal connections and a sense of
community. They could also offer a more flexible approach to
worship and organizational structure, allowing for individual
preferences and needs to be accommodated.

Ultimately, the approach that works best will depend on the
specific needs and preferences of the congregation. It may be
helpful to gather input and feedback from the congregation and to
be open to experimenting with different approaches until a balance
is found that works for everyone.

Me: I envision a network of churches with autistic leadership, that
are self-governing, self-propagating, and self-supporting. One of
the challenges I see is that the conventional system of leadership
formation is hostile to the neurodivergent population:
denominational seminaries are not usually designed for them, and
too often, pastors are expected to be both spiritual leaders and
non-profit corporate executives, and that may pose difficulties for
many of them.

What would be the best ways to create new alternatives to the
traditional formation of church leaders, that are truly for and by
autistic people?

ChatGPT: Creating new alternatives to the traditional formation of
church leaders that are truly for and by autistic people will
require a thoughtful and intentional approach. Here are some
possible ways to create new alternatives:

Partner with existing organizations: Consider partnering with
organizations that specialize in leadership development for
autistic people, such as Autism Speaks [Me: WTF? Hell no.],
Autistic Self Advocacy Network [Me: good], or Autism Society [Me:
okay]. These organizations can provide valuable insights and
resources to help develop a leadership formation program that is
truly for and by autistic people.

Co-create with autistic individuals: It is essential to involve
autistic individuals in the development and implementation of any
leadership formation program. This means co-creating with them and
incorporating their ideas, feedback, and perspectives throughout
the process. Autistic individuals could be involved in the design
of the program, the selection of curriculum and materials, and the
delivery of training.

Use a flexible and strengths-based approach: Traditional formation
of church leaders often requires a rigid curriculum and
expectations, which may not work for autistic individuals. A more
flexible and strengths-based approach that takes into account the
unique abilities and challenges of autistic individuals may be more
effective. This approach could involve providing individualized
coaching, mentorship, and apprenticeships that focus on developing
specific strengths and skills.

Incorporate technology: Technology can be a valuable tool for
autistic individuals to access training and development
opportunities. Consider incorporating online training modules,
webinars, and virtual communities of practice. These can provide a
more flexible and accessible way for autistic individuals to access
training and development opportunities.

Overall, creating new alternatives to the traditional formation of
church leaders that are truly for and by autistic people will
require a collaborative and innovative approach. It is important to
involve autistic individuals in the process, use a flexible and
strengths-based approach, and incorporate technology to create
accessible and inclusive training opportunities.

Me: Based on the latest CDC estimate, about 2 to 2.5 percent of the
U.S. population may be autistic. If this is the case, the autistic
community represents a sizable minority in the United States,
larger than the Chinese-American population (1.5 percent of the
U.S., est. 2019), and comparable to the Native American and Alaska
Native populations (2.9 percent of the U.S., est. 2021). While this
shows good potential, I find a couple of possible obstacles.

First, it is thought that about 80 to 85 percent of autistic people
in the U.S. are either unemployed or severely underemployed. This
makes self-funding of churches a significant challenge if we are to
depend on a conventional tithes and annual pledges model of
fundraising.

Second, a popular perception is that autistic folks are more likely
to be atheists or non-religious. This may make churches like this a
small niche within a small niche, and for a dispersed population
who may not necessarily find themselves in a highly social
environment, simply the tasks of reaching out to them and building
a solid, committed membership can be daunting.

What are some good ways to overcome these challenges?

ChatGPT: You raise valid concerns about the challenges that may
arise in creating a church with a predominantly autistic
membership. Here are some possible ways to overcome these
challenges:

Explore alternative funding models: As you mentioned, relying on
the traditional tithes and annual pledges model of fundraising may
be challenging for a church with a predominantly autistic
membership. Consider exploring alternative funding models, such as
applying for grants or seeking out corporate sponsors.
Additionally, creating a sustainable business model that generates
revenue could help the church become self-supporting.

Focus on inclusion: While it may be true that autistic individuals
are more likely to be atheists or non-religious, it is important to
focus on inclusion and creating a welcoming environment for all
individuals, regardless of their beliefs. This can be done by
emphasizing the community and support aspects of the church, rather
than focusing solely on the religious aspects. Additionally,
offering a variety of programs and activities that appeal to
different interests and needs can help attract a diverse
membership.

Utilize online platforms: Autistic individuals may not necessarily
find themselves in highly social environments, so utilizing online
platforms such as social media, video conferencing, and online
forums can provide a way to reach out to and connect with potential
members. These platforms can also be used to provide support and
resources to members who may have difficulty attending in-person
events.

Collaborate with other organizations: Collaborating with other
organizations that serve the autistic community, such as advocacy
groups, support groups, or disability-focused nonprofits, can help
increase visibility and reach a wider audience. These organizations
may be able to provide resources and support to help build a
committed membership.

Overall, overcoming the challenges of funding and outreach will
require creativity, flexibility, and a willingness to adapt to the
needs of the community. By focusing on inclusion, utilizing online
platforms, and collaborating with other organizations, a church
with a predominantly autistic membership can create a supportive
and welcoming community that meets the unique needs of its members.

Me: You make great points! Sometimes I wonder if some aspects of
church ministries may be replaced by artificial intelligence in the
near future. For example, I can imagine how a 24/7 prayer ministry
might be augmented by an AI chatbot instead of merely receiving
prayer requests online. AI could generate encouraging messages
based on prayer requests and even pray with people (or more
precisely, generate customized prayers based on callers' needs),
and forward messages to appropriate staffers or pastors within the
ministry for later follow-up. Would artificial intelligence
eventually make some aspects of pastoral care automated, and make
some ministers redundant?

ChatGPT: Artificial intelligence (AI) is already being used in some
aspects of pastoral care, such as chatbots that offer mental health
support or Bible study assistance. However, there are limitations
to the capabilities of AI in this context, and it is unlikely that
it would replace human ministers entirely.

While AI chatbots can provide customized prayers and encouraging
messages based on prayer requests, they are not able to provide the
same level of emotional support and empathy that a human minister
can. Pastoral care involves not only prayer and scriptural guidance
but also listening, counseling, and offering comfort in times of
crisis. These are skills that are developed through human
experience and are difficult to replicate with AI.

Additionally, many people seek out pastoral care because they
desire human connection and support. They want to talk to someone
who understands them and can offer a personal touch. While AI can
provide information and resources, it cannot provide the same level
of personal connection and relationship-building that is central to
pastoral care.

In short, while AI may augment certain aspects of pastoral care, it
is unlikely to replace human ministers entirely. Human connection
and empathy are central to pastoral care, and these are skills that
cannot be replicated by machines.

Me: I am conflicted between two options when it comes to planting
churches that are predominantly autistic in membership and
leadership. One option is to make the church very open-ended in
terms of theological positions and doctrines, making it open and
welcoming to anyone but risks being too shallow and losing focus
while trying to be "everything for everybody." This could also
invite more internal conflicts because there are few shared values
and points of unity within the congregation. The other option is to
be clear about certain distinctives and articulate core values,
theological positions, and doctrines. But this could risk
alienating too many people and hinders the church growth. Maybe
there is a point of balance between these two extremes, but what
are some of the advantages and drawbacks of either of these
options?

ChatGPT: There are advantages and drawbacks to both options and
finding the right balance will depend on the specific context and
goals of the church plant.

The advantage of making the church open-ended in terms of
theological positions and doctrines is that it can create a
welcoming environment for a wide range of people. This approach can
help to build a diverse congregation that reflects the broader
community, and it may make it easier to reach out to those who are
not already part of a church. However, the drawback of this
approach is that it may be difficult to build a strong sense of
unity and shared purpose within the congregation. Without a clear
set of core values and beliefs, it can be challenging to build a
community that is focused on a common mission.

The advantage of being clear about certain distinctives and
articulating core values, theological positions, and doctrines is
that it can help to create a strong sense of identity and purpose
within the congregation. This approach can help to build a
community that is united around a common mission and shared values.
However, the drawback of this approach is that it may limit the
appeal of the church to those who do not share the same beliefs and
values. This can make it more difficult to reach out to a diverse
range of people and may hinder the growth of the church.

In general, finding a point of balance between these two approaches
may be the best strategy. This could involve articulating core
values and beliefs while remaining open to a diverse range of
theological positions and perspectives. It could also involve
focusing on a specific mission or purpose that is shared by the
congregation while allowing for flexibility and diversity in other
areas. Ultimately, the key is to find a strategy that allows the
church to build a strong sense of community and purpose while
remaining open and welcoming to a diverse range of people.

[Me: Here ChatGPT is merely repeating what I wrote using more words
and with some rephrasing. This is a typical non-answer I sometimes
find from an AI!]

=> https://thewillow.substack.com/p/talking-my-visions-with-chatgpt
An enhanced version of this article with text formatting and
hyperlinks

You are viewing proxied material from smol.pub. The copyright of proxied material belongs to its original authors. Any comments or complaints in relation to proxied material should be directed to the original authors of the content concerned. Please see the disclaimer for more details.