Will AI Impact the Hiring of Clergy in the United States?

Artificial intelligence (AI) is changing the workplace, and one of the big concerns that many people have is whether or not AI will be adopted in ways that reduce the number of people hired into certain jobs. People have speculated about different kinds of jobs that are especially at risk (e.g., paralegals), but hardly any attention has been paid to whether or not AI will impact the hiring of clergy.

So, will AI eventually replace clergy?

I think that the best answer to that question is: probably not much, at least anytime soon.

Economists often distinguish between tasks and jobs. AI is excellent at certain tasks, particularly those involving the production and organization of information. Having AI undertake these kinds of tasks can be very useful to clergy. In fact, there is already evidence that clergy are already using AI in significant ways. In one recent study, only 13% of clergy respondents claimed to not use it at all. Those that use AI report employing it to do biblical research, graphic design, and other organizational tasks. In fact, the share of clergy using AI to assist with sermon preparation has doubled in the last two years, so it is clear that there are some real productivity gains to be realized by clergy using AI.

Yet, the job of clergy involves much more than producing sermons. Clergy counsel families during times of grief, comfort the sick in hospitals, perform weddings and funerals, mentor young people, resolve conflicts within congregations, and provide spiritual leadership. These responsibilities depend on personal relationships, emotional intelligence, and credibility. In other words, the most effective clergy are people whom members know and trust, and AI cannot easily replace the human relationships that are central to religious leadership. From an economic perspective, AI appears more likely to complement clergy rather than substitute for them.

This is not to say that all jobs within religious organizations are safe. Many congregations employ administrative and support staff whose routine tasks are more susceptible to automation. Part-time staff may find their jobs more easily replaced, especially in small or shrinking congregations where budgets are very tight.

However, these changes are more likely to alter how religious organizations conduct their business rather than eliminate the need for clergy. For now, AI is more likely to change how clergy spend their time than to reduce the number of clergy who are hired. If anything, AI may allow pastors, priests, rabbis, and other religious leaders to devote even more attention to the people-centered work that only human beings can effectively provide.

Rise in Social Hostilities Involving Religion Around the World

The Pew Research Center has been tracking and measuring the regulation of religion around the world for almost two decades now, and earlier this month they released their latest update.

The headline is that from 2022 to 2023 there was a sizeable increase in social hostilities involving religion around the world (notice that there is a lag in the release of their data, which is why they are reporting on 2023). The full pdf report is here, but you can read the detailed summary here.

The report shows updates to their two indices: the Social Hostilities Index and the Government Restrictions Index. According to the former, the number of countries that were classified as having a "High" or "Very High" level of social hostilities increased from 45 (out of 198 countries) in 2022 to 55 in 2023. The median classification did not change, which means that the increase in hostility happened in countries that already have been having higher-than-average levels of social hostility.

You do not need to read the full report, but definitely read the entire detailed summary linked above. This will give you a brief but good introduction to the kinds of hostilities and regulations that religious people around the world face. Then, after reading the detailed summary, you can check out the full report if you are interested.

By the time you are done reading, you should:

• Understand the difference between the Social Hostilities Index (SHI) and the Government Restrictions Indices (GRI).
• Know the trends in both indices since 2007.
• Know of the types of regulation and hostilities that have been experienced in several countries.

Later in the course you will learn much more about how religious practice is hindered around the world.

The End of Germany's Surveillance of Scientologists

Germany has engaged in surveillance of the Church of Scientology since for the past 30 years, but that surveillance came to an end in May 2026. See the report on the Religion Clause website. You can also see the report from the Church of Scientology here.

The surveillance began in the 1990s after the Berlin Wall fell and East and West Germany were reunified. This was a tumultuous time, and people with political power were open to hearing accusations that certain groups of people or institutions--like the Church of Scientology--were a threat to the new country. This surveillance continued for three decades despite no clear evidence to support the accusations that Scientologists worked to undermine the German constitution. During the 30 years of surveillance, Scientologists gained new protections (or at least a lessoning of targeted discrimination) in many countries. It just took Germany much longer than the others to admit that Scientologists were not the threat like detractors of the group claimed them to be.

Though perhaps it is too much to say that the German government "admitted" that Scientologists were not a threat. Interestingly, the German government did not actually acknowledge that their surveillance efforts were misguided. Instead, they explained that other matters are more deserving of their limited resources. In effect, the German government is claiming to use a cost-benefit analysis and now calculated that the opportunity cost of continuing the surveillance had become too high. This leaves open the theoretical possibility that the surveillance may be reinstated in the future if the cost-benefit analysis changes, but it seems unlikely. With very little to show from their efforts over 30 years, the lack of an admission of wasted effort seems more like a way for the government to save some face rather than a strong stance against Scientology.

To be clear, I am not endorsing Scientology. Instead, I am merely raising your awareness of the kinds of legal discrimination that happens against minority religious groups. Having religious freedom in a country means that even "unfamiliar," "different," or "strange" religious groups have their rights protected just as much as long-established religious groups. Religious freedom continues to be a negotiated matter for many religious groups in many countries."

Gabi the AI Monk

On Wednesday, May 6, 2026, a four-foot-tall, humanoid robot named Gabi went through a special ordination to become what may be the world's first robotic monk. See this article at the Smithsonian Magazine. The ceremony, which was held at the (Buddhist) Jogyesa Temple in Seoul, South Korea, was adapted with Gabi's robotic nature in mind, with special vows to save energy by not overcharging and to not harm other robots.

You can see clips of the ordination ceremony here on YouTube.

The obvious context for this development is the adoption of AI and AI-related tools in more and more of our everyday lives. That AI spills over into religious life is not surprising at all, as has been noted here on this blog in many past blog posts (just scroll down in past months and you will see them). In fact, as mentioned in the article, there are also a small number of known cases of robots actively participating in religious rituals, providing religious instruction, performing spiritual care, or actively preaching. However, the ordination of a robotic monk seems to be a new step with some symbolic meaning. I hope we learn more about what functions Gabi will actually fulfill for the temple, and perhaps some of them will be more than perfunctory.

Other relevant context for this development context, which is noted in the article, is that Buddhism is the only major religious tradition that is losing followers worldwide (see this Pew Research article). I do not expect that the incorporation of robots into temple activities will not reverse this trend, but perhaps ift can still help Buddhist temples by lowering some of their operational costs.

That said, given the increased frequency of interactions with AI in many countries, I do expect that robots and other AI tools will find increasing use in religion worldwide. Although most religious practitioners will still prefer human interaction, the number who prefer an AI-mediated interaction with their religious group can only go up. And as AI technology improves, do not be surprised when more religious groups find ways to incorporate AI technology--be it robots or something else--when providing religious services. Some religious groups are always among the earliest adopters of new technologies when they believe that the new technology can help them in their religious missions.

And if you are worried that Gabi may feel alone as the only robotic monk at the Jogyesa Temple, then have no fear: the temple has already incorporated other robots into some of their activities.

2026 USCIRF Annual Report

The USCIRF released its 2026 report last week. Read the read the press release here, and find the full pdf of the report on their Annual Reports page.

This year's report classified 18 countries as Countries of Particular Concern:

• Afghanistan
• Burma
• China
• Cuba
• Eritrea
• India
• Iran
• Libya
• Nicaragua
• Nigeria
• North Korea
• Pakistan
• Russia
• Saudi Arabia
• Syria
• Tajikistan
• Turkmenistan
• Vietnam

This list includes all 16 countries classified as CPCs in the 2025 report, but further adds Libya and Syria.

Religious Minorities in Iran

The death of Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, following the attacks by the U.S. and Israel has created profound uncertainty for the country's religious minorities. It also provides us in this class with a real-world case study in how government regulation shapes religious markets and the survival of minority religious groups.

Iran maintains a highly regulated religious market. Unlike the United States, where low barriers to entry allow diverse religious groups to compete freely, Iran maintains an official state religion with extreme government favoritism. The theocratic regime doesn't just prefer Shia Islam; it actively suppresses religious competitors through systematic persecution, property confiscation, and exclusion from education and employment.

This RNS article reveals the stark reality of this regulation and its effects on religious minorities. One of those groups are the followers of the Baha'i religion. Bahaʼis are systematically excluded from higher education and have their businesses shuttered, and crackdowns have intensified following the Israel-Iran conflict. These actions create a large barrier to entry for Baha'is because legal and social obstacles prevent religious entrepreneurs from starting new groups or minority religions from operating freely.

Yet, somehow, religious minorities can find ways to survive in such hostile regulatory environments. The article notes that Iran's religious minorities, particularly the 300,000 Bahaʼís, continue to exist despite decades of systematic oppression. This persistence relies in part on their ability to produce the club goods that comprise part of their religious communities. This includes the shared benefits of belonging—spiritual support, social networks, cultural identity—that create strong incentives for members to maintain their affiliation even when the costs are extremely high.

At the same time, economic theory also predicts that the intense regulation suppresses religious pluralism, and if the official state church fails to meet religious consumers' needs, then religious vitality can also decline. Indeed, the article notes growing secularization among Iran's Muslim majority, with surveys showing over 45% of respondents identifying as having no faith by 2020. This suggests that excessive religious regulation can backfire, reducing not just minority religions but overall religiosity in society.

As Iran faces this leadership transition, the fate of its religious minorities will depend largely on whether the new regime maintains the current highly regulated religious market or allows greater religious competition. For students of this class, Iran's situation demonstrates how government policies don't just shape political outcomes; they fundamentally determine whether diverse religious communities can survive and thrive.

(This article was written with the help of the Econ 17 ClassChat Chatbot.)

Global Religious Diversity Today

A report released last week from Pew Research Center, "Religious Diversity Around the World” (2026), provides a nice overview of religious diversity across 201 countries and territories. Using a modified version of the Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI)—a measure economists typically use to assess market concentration—Pew constructs a Religious Diversity Index (RDI) ranging from 0 (complete religious homogeneity) to 10 (perfectly even distribution across seven religious categories).

The most religiously diverse country in the world is Singapore, with an RDI score of 9.3. No single religious tradition dominates: Buddhists (31%), religiously unaffiliated (20%), Christians (19%), Muslims (16%), Hindus (5%), and others (9%) all have significant presence. Suriname ranks second.

At the opposite end are Yemen and Afghanistan, where Muslims account for more than 99% of the population, yielding RDI scores close to 0.

A striking finding is that a single religious tradition forms a majority in 194 out of 201 countries. On the one hand, that makes it sound like religious pluralism is not quite so prevalent as might be supposed. Indeed, pluralism where no group exceeds 50% is rare, occurring in only seven countries. On the other hand, just looking at religious tradition can be misleading because there can be quite a lot of diversity in religious teaching and practices within a particular religious tradition. Just think of the Unitarian Universalists and the Amish, who both are rooted in Christianity (see the discussion on these groups in the book).

This last point is particularly relevant for the United States, whose RDI of 5.8 ties it with Nigeria as the most religiously diverse among the world's most populous countries. Although the U.S. is majority Christian (64%), nearly 30% are religiously unaffiliated, and smaller shares belong to other traditions. But keep in mind, too, that there is also tremendous diversity within Christianity in the United States, something that the RDI will not accurately account for.

The RDI is a good example of how a measurement concept that came from economics—namely the HHI—has found its way into the study of religion. However, you may be interested to know that the RDI is actually not the first time the HHI has been used to study religion, and it just takes a little internet sleuthing to find the earlier applications.

Overall, I suggest that you take away a two main lessons from this research report by Pew.

First, most of the world’s population lives in moderately diverse countries. Only 1% live in “very high” diversity contexts. This suggests that there are strong forces that drive both a degree of pluralism as well as a degree of concentration within a country. Can you think of some concepts from the book that would help to explain this fact?

Second, there is much to be gained by applying concepts from other disciplines to the study of religion. In this case, the RDI is an application of the HHI from economics, but of course there are many ideas that have come from sociology, psychology, and other fields. It is good to keep an open mind and an interdisciplinary view when studying religion.

Why Are There No Non-Christian Megachurches?

Megachurches—those congregations drawing 2,000 or more people each week—are almost entirely Christian, and usually Protestant, and it is natural to ask: "Why don’t we see megachurches in non-Christian religious traditions?"

At first glance, the pattern seems puzzling, especially because there are large gatherings in other religions traditions. For example, major mosques can host tens of thousands of persons for Friday prayers, and Hindu temples and Buddhist shrines attract massive crowds during festivals and pilgrimages. Yet, these gatherings do not resemble the megachurches as typically conceived by social scientist of religion: a single congregation, meeting weekly, under centralized leadership, offering a wide array of programs, and supported by voluntary attendance and donations.

From an economics-of-religion perspective, the explanation lies less in theology, which is where our attention might be instinctively drawn, and lies more in organization, incentives, and scale economies.

Let's first start with how religious “production” works. Christianity is unusually well suited to mass production. In a typical Christian congregation, the weekly gathering is sermon-centered with a preacher and an audience, and this setup scales efficiently. Once the fixed costs of buildings, technology, and staff are paid, adding more attendees is relatively cheap. That creates a potential incentive to grow large.

Contrast this with other kinds of religious activities that do not scale as easily. Small groups which focus on scriptural learning do not scale in the same way as a weekly religious service, and the building of strong social ties as in an Amish community also do not scale. Hinduism centers on household rituals and temple offerings rather than weekly congregational worship, so there is no scope for scaling up. Similarly, Buddhism often prioritizes meditation, monastic authority, and individualized practice. These modes of religious production generate fewer economies of scale, so there’s less payoff to building a single massive congregation.

Second, consider authority structures. Megachurches typically revolve around entrepreneurial leaders—charismatic pastors with significant autonomy over doctrine, programming, and branding. Indeed, about 40% of megachurches are non-denominational, which provides them with more flexibility in what they teach and how they operate. This governance structure works well in competitive religious markets like in the United States where religious groups compete with each other. In contrast, religions with strong centralized hierarchies (Catholicism, Shi’a Islam) or dispersed authority (many forms of Hinduism) limit the ability of any one local leader to grow a congregation unchecked.

Third, megachurches thrive in religious markets characterized by competition and choice. In the U.S., individuals can easily switch congregations, denominations, or opt out altogether. Under these conditions, growth-oriented groups can... well... grow! And growth-oriented groups, especially evangelical Christian groups, are also internally motivated to adapt their style of religion to appeal to segments of the population who are dissatisfied with other options. Other traditions, especially those tied to ethnicity, family, or inherited identity, face weaker incentives to compete for marginal attendees.

Thus, the absence of non-Christian megachurches is about the underlying economics of religious production, authority, and competition, and that also means that megachurches in other religious traditions are possible. It is really a question of whether the congregation's leaders prioritize growth and are willing to design religious services in a way to accommodate that growth, and whether there is demand for it by religious consumers. Remember, there's a supply side and a demand side. As proof of this concept, there are in fact some large, non-Christian congregations. One example is Temple Emanu-El in New York, which is reported (though I cannot confirm) to have over 2000 families in its membership.

The megachurch is ultimately an institutional solution that some congregations have adopted, and although Christian congregations are well-suited to this solution, Christianity is not the only religious tradition that can leverage this institutional arrangement.

Acknowledgement: ChatGPT 5 assisted in the writing of this post.