Diocese ‘hires’ AI fundraising staffer in pilot program. Meet ‘Maria’
Bridgeport Diocese in Connecticut is piloting an AI virtual engagement officer named Maria to assist in fundraising and discern parishioner support preferences. The AI officer operates digitally, analyzing data to enhance connection between the diocese and its faithful rather than working in a physical office. Bishop Frank J. Caggiano announced the initiative as a way to explore technology’s role in deepening community engagement and fundraising effectiveness. The program reflects a broader trend of religious organizations experimenting with AI tools for outreach and administrative tasks.
about 15 hours ago
The Diocese of Bridgeport in Connecticut has launched a pilot program that uses an artificial‑intelligence‑generated “virtual engagement officer” named Maria to assist its fundraising efforts and deepen digital pastoral outreach. The initiative, developed with the tech firm Givzey, is limited to about 1,000 volunteer participants and is designed to complement, not replace, human staff while addressing ethical and theological concerns raised by Church leaders. 1 2
Maria is presented as an AI‑driven fundraising staffer who contacts opted‑in donors via text and email to learn their charitable interests and then routes them to human diocesan staff for follow‑up.
The pilot is expected to run for one to two years, with participants providing only a name, phone number and parish affiliation on a dedicated webpage. 1 2
The virtual officer was created in partnership with Boston‑based Givzey, which supplies the autonomous fundraising platform Version2.ai.
Version2.ai employs “virtual engagement officers” (VEOs) that can handle multi‑step tasks, distinguishing them from simple large‑language‑model chatbots. 1 2
Maria’s visual design—blue blazer and a blend of ethnic facial features—references the diocese’s dedication to the Immaculate Heart of Mary and its diverse Catholic community. 1
Deacon Patrick Toole, the diocesan chancellor with a three‑decade background at IBM, stresses transparency, bias mitigation, and strict oversight as essential.
The diocese and Givzey have instituted “huge safeguards” to ensure the AI’s training data are appropriate and that it stays within fundraising boundaries. 2
Bishop Frank Caggiano, who hosts the “Let Me Be Frank” podcast, acknowledges the moral questions surrounding autonomous AI and notes that Pope Leo XIV has placed AI on the Church’s agenda for theological reflection. 1 2
Early interactions show Maria directing parishioners to volunteer opportunities and family‑ministry groups, illustrating its role as a bridge rather than a replacement for human connection. 2
The pilot is seen as a model that could be expanded to the roughly 200 U.S. dioceses, provided clear guidelines are established to preserve the Church’s uniquely relational mission. 2
Examine Catholic doctrine on technology’s role in evangelization
Technology belongs to the Church’s evangelizing means—but never as a substitute for the Gospel itself, for witness, or for the conversion of heart. Catholic doctrine treats communications technology (including the internet and AI-era tools) as potentially powerful instruments for proclamation and dialogue, while also insisting on moral discernment because technological progress can shape culture in ways that distort truth, freedom, and the human person.
Catholic teaching approaches technology evangelistically in two complementary ways:
Catholic doctrine grounds media use in the Church’s mission: evangelization requires proclamation (and catechesis), but also communication suited to contemporary cultures.
The Church teaches that it is not optional to use modern communications. It would be “guilty” before the Lord if it did not use such means.
Pope John Paul II explicitly links “computer telecommunications” and “computer culture” to the Church’s mission, describing how they can:
The Pontifical Council’s teaching emphasizes that evangelization is not reduced to one method. Traditional means—witness of life, catechesis, personal contact, liturgy, etc.—remain essential, but the use of media is “essential” in evangelization and catechesis.
So, technology is best understood as an instrumental cause (a means) for:
A central doctrinal principle is that it is not enough merely to “broadcast” content. Communications technology creates a cultural environment—with “new languages,” “new techniques,” and even “a new psychology”—and evangelization must take this seriously.
The Church explicitly warns:
“It is not enough to use the media simply to spread the Christian message… It is also necessary to integrate that message into the ‘new culture’ created by modern communications…”
This implies a theological and pastoral requirement:
The Church and Internet document states that “human experience itself is an experience of media,” meaning digital environments can become the framework through which people interpret reality, identity, and community.
Therefore, evangelization must respond not only to “topics” online but to the deeper habits of thought and expectations that media culture forms.
John Paul II describes the opportunity: social communications can allow the Church to reach wide audiences, hear public opinion more clearly, and enter ongoing discussion.
Likewise, the Church’s internet reflections encourage Catholics not to fear opening the “doors” of social communication so that “his Good News may be heard from the housetops of the world.”
Catholic doctrine refuses the simplistic view that technology is morally neutral. The Church and its theological commentary emphasize the ambiguity and the anthropological consequences of technological development, especially in communication, data management, and digital intelligence.
The theological reflection recognizes that “the discernment” does acknowledge the “value positive” of innovations when “well used,” calling them “a great resource for humanity” in civilizational and cultural aspects.
This is compatible with the Church’s affirmation of media as an evangelizing tool.
A key point is that the “recent accelerat[ion]” in digital domains (communications, data, AI, and related fields) increases the complexity and delicacy of discernment.
The same source stresses that technology influences even:
In other words, technology doesn’t just deliver information; it can subtly train the human subject to interpret freedom, truth, relationships, and God differently. This directly affects evangelization because evangelization aims at conversion of the person, not only at changing opinions.
A separate Catholic analysis argues that modernity’s technological logic can be part of a deeper cultural disorder—moving society toward secular reductionism and even forms of “information” and “virtual reality” that can become propaganda-like.
In this perspective, evangelization cannot be only tactical (how to use tools) but must also be cultural (how to confront the underlying logic that shapes life).
Even when technology transmits doctrinal content accurately, Catholic doctrine insists that persuasion and fruitfulness ultimately depend on conversion—especially on the unity between faith and life.
William May, reflecting John Paul II’s thought, emphasizes that moral truth arguments often fail because persuasion requires “a change of heart—a metanoia.”
Thus, technology can support proclamation, but it cannot replace interior change:
May also stresses that laypeople share evangelizing work by bearing witness to Christ and by an “integrated approach to life” inspired by the Gospel.
This matters for technology: content alone is insufficient if digital life contradicts Gospel witness (habits, speech, honesty, justice, charity online). The Church’s “integration into new culture” principle supports this, because it targets not only language but the formation of persons inside culture.
Drawing these teachings together, Catholic doctrine implies several practical principles.
John Paul II’s teaching to bishops links media to the ability of the message to “penetrate into the conscience of each,” aiming for personal “adherence” and commitment.
Technology is therefore ordered toward personal encounter—not toward depersonalized propaganda.
John Paul II emphasizes that truth cannot impose itself except by its own truth, “with both gentleness and power.”
This aligns with the moral requirement that the Church’s use of communications should respect the dignity and freedom of those receiving the message.
Catholic doctrine on technology’s role in evangelization is neither naive optimism nor blanket rejection. It affirms that modern communications—computers, networks, and the internet—can significantly advance the Church’s evangelizing mission, strengthen dialogue, and help the world hear the Gospel.
At the same time, it insists on discernment because technology reshapes culture and can influence how people understand themselves and God, making evangelization a task that includes cultural critique and spiritual conversion—not merely the distribution of religious information.