The social drift of the memory of Charlie Kirk, resurrected by artificial intelligence. Tasteless videos that add nothing and ridicule faith.

---

 

What is the limit between tribute, memory, and bad taste?

We ask ourselves this as we observe the proliferation of grotesque, or at least forced, content generated by artificial intelligence portraying Charlie Kirk after his death being held by Jesus or taking a selfie with Pope Francis.

 

Artificial Intelligence “Resurrects” Charlie Kirk

Not only videos and images, but AI has also “resurrected” Kirk’s voice, and numerous Protestant churches in the United States are playing artificial clips of the well-known conservative during sermons, killed on September 10.

In these reconstructions, Kirk states: “I am Charlie. My faith cost me my life, but now I am forever in glory”, triggering applause from the faithful. The activist then introduces four Christian martyrs: Paul, Stephen, Andrew, and Peter.

Another clip shows Charlie Kirk generated by artificial intelligence while filming himself in heaven next to Jesus, Abraham Lincoln, John F. Kennedy, and Martin Luther King Jr. with the background music of “Knocking on Heaven’s Door”.

In another video, Kirk is seen sitting under the gazebo where he was killed, then stops talking and runs up a staircase toward a smiling Jesus. In yet another one, Kirk is accompanied by Jesus while holding a hat with the Trump slogan “Make America Great Again”, as they walk toward the camera among the clouds.

Social media is full of influencers who first artificially create videos in which Kirk speaks about faith and his martyrdom (phrases he never actually said), and then watch him speak and visibly cry, wiping their tears while nodding between sobs.

 

The Church and Artificial Intelligence

Is this really necessary? Isn’t it rather an excess that crosses the line between homage and kitsch? The risk of bad taste, of “cringe,” is just around the corner.

Some also reflect on the ethical issue. Reference is often made to the notion of respect due to the deceased, and some apply this in opposing the digital “resurrection” of a person, simulating their speeches and gestures.

Fortunately, the Catholic Church keeps well away from these initiatives and, indeed, is perhaps the first to have long since set guidelines for addressing artificial intelligence: in the document Antiqua et nova of January 2025, the wisdom of the Church recalls the risk of “replacing authentic relationality with a lifeless simulacrum”.

 

When Faith Is Ridiculed

We continue to believe that memory and commemoration are deep needs; it is right to want to remember and honor someone even after their death. But in the digital age, not everything AI can do should be done—in fact, it often proves undignified.

The digital “resurrection” of Charlie Kirk, in our view, falls among those practices that not only add nothing but risk ridiculing faith.

For those who wish to do so, silence and prayer always remain valid. That is where memory truly preserves its strength, without the need for artificial effects.