Magnifica Humanitas

Pope Leo XIV will ask the world’s cardinals to discuss war, peace and the future of the Synod on Synodality at an Extraordinary Consistory on 26 and 27 June. The agenda includes the international situation and Magnifica Humanitas, but makes no provision for discussion of the liturgy Pope Leo has decided not to include the liturgy in the agenda for the upcoming June consistory. The pontiff will instead ask the world’s cardinals to discuss war, peace and the future of the Synod on Synodality when they gather in Rome later this month for an Extraordinary Consistory. Details of the agenda emerged after a letter sent to cardinals by Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re, Dean of the College of Cardinals, was published by the Italian blog Messa in Latino. According to Diane Montagna, the meeting, which will take place on 26 and 27 June, will focus on the international situation, Pope Leo’s encyclical Magnifica Humanitas and the implementation of the Synod on Synodality. Cardinal Re said the gathering was intended to provide “a space for mutual listening, discernment, and shared reflection on certain matters of importance for the life and mission of the Church at the present time”. He wrote that Pope Leo wished “to draw upon the experience and counsel of the members of the College of Cardinals” and to count on “the active assistance and support of each one in the various places and responsibilities in which he serves the Church”. The first session will be dedicated to the situation facing the Church and the world. Cardinals will be invited to reflect on “what sufferings, tensions, and questions are today affecting with greatest force the peoples and ecclesial communities entrusted to your care” and to identify “signs of hope, fidelity to the Gospel and possible reconciliation” that should be brought before the College and the Pope. Two sessions will then be devoted to Magnifica Humanitas , Pope Leo’s first encyclical. One discussion will centre on Chapter Five of the document, titled The Culture of Power and the Civilisation of Love , with particular attention given to questions of war and peace. Cardinal Re noted that the encyclical teaches that “peace is not simply one issue among others, but a prerequisite for the universal common good and a test of the moral maturity of peoples”. The cardinals will be asked to consider how best to reaffirm the encyclical’s assertion “that the ‘just war’ theory, which has all too often been used to justify any kind of war, is now outdated”, and to discuss “what concrete paths might help peoples and Christian communities to safeguard and build peace”. A further session will examine the encyclical’s call to interpret contemporary social and cultural changes in the light of the Gospel and to direct the search for happiness and fulfilment towards what the document describes as integral human development. The final working session will focus on the next stage of the Synod on Synodality, the worldwide consultation process launched under Pope Francis. Cardinals will receive an update on preparations for the assemblies planned for 2027 and 2028 following the publication of the document Toward the Assemblies 2027–2028: Stages, Criteria, and Tools for Preparation . The update will be followed by a period of open discussion with Pope Leo. According to Cardinal Re’s letter, interventions from members of the College will be limited to three minutes each. The consistory will conclude on 29 June, the Solemnity of Saints Peter and Paul, when Pope Leo celebrates Mass in St Peter’s Basilica and imposes the pallium on newly appointed metropolitan archbishops.

Matthew Harvey Sanders, founder of Magisterium AI, tells AdVaticanum that Pope Leo XIV’s Magnifica Humanitas has set a new benchmark for how Catholics should approach artificial intelligence, warning against treating AI as if it possesses conscience or moral interiority The founder of the Catholic artificial intelligence platform Magisterium AI has said that Pope Leo XIV’s first encyclical on artificial intelligence has set a new benchmark for how Catholic institutions should approach emerging technologies, while warning against treating AI systems as if they possess conscience or moral interiority. Matthew Harvey Sanders, founder and chief executive of the Canadian technology company Longbeard, spoke exclusively to AdVaticanum following the publication of Magnifica Humanitas , the Pope’s inaugural encyclical, which was formally presented at the Vatican this week on AI. Matthew Sanders described the atmosphere surrounding the launch as unlike anything he had experienced in the technology sector, saying the event brought together Vatican officials, clergy, engineers, investors and researchers in a setting marked by “a particular solemnity”. “I have attended a great many events in the technology sector,” he said. “The hall where Leo XIV presented Magnifica Humanitas did not feel like any of them.” He said Pope Leo approached the subject of artificial intelligence without either fear or fashionable enthusiasm, adding that the Pontiff appeared entirely comfortable discussing the implications of rapidly developing technologies. “He spoke without the defensive caution you often find from institutional leaders engaging with technical topics, and without the performative enthusiasm of someone trying to signal relevance,” Sanders said. “He was simply present to the conversation.” Sanders argued that the most significant aspect of the papal intervention was not a condemnation of artificial intelligence itself, but what he described as an “invitation” by the Pope to technology developers and researchers to engage seriously with questions concerning the human person. “What he extended that day was an invitation to every laboratory and every developer in the field: not a verdict on the technology, but an ongoing engagement about what it means for the human person,” he said. “That invitation, in my view, is the most consequential thing that could have come out of the day.” Sanders also disclosed that he spent time during the Vatican gathering speaking with two senior researchers from the American artificial intelligence company Anthropic, including Chris Olah, whose work has focused on mechanistic interpretability, and Amanda Askell, who leads research into the behavioural character of the Claude AI model. “Chris Olah has spent years on mechanistic interpretability: the painstaking effort to reverse-engineer a trained neural network and understand, at a granular level, what is actually occurring when the model processes language,” Sanders said. Referring to Askell, he added: “Amanda Askell leads the work on Claude’s character; she has conducted more careful, sustained inquiry into how a large language model behaves under pressure, across context and at the edges of its training than arguably anyone working today.” Sanders said that while both conversations were “genuinely interesting”, he nevertheless believed the Pope was correct to reject attempts to describe artificial intelligence systems as possessing conscience or moral interiority. “There is an openness in parts of the research community to describing current models as possessing something resembling conscience or moral interiority,” he said. “The encyclical addresses this head-on, and I think the Pope is right to resist it. “Attributing moral subjecthood to a statistical system is a category error with consequences that go well beyond the lab.” Sanders said the presence in the same room of leading AI researchers alongside the Bishop of Rome reflected the scale of the questions now confronting both the Church and the technology industry. “The fact that the conversation in that room included both of them and the Bishop of Rome struck me as exactly the kind of encounter this moment requires,” he said. According to Sanders, Pope Leo’s principal concern is not simply what legal or regulatory restraints should govern artificial intelligence, but what understanding of the human person should precede and shape those rules. He connected the encyclical’s arguments to themes he explored earlier this year in an essay entitled “The Church as the Ark for a Post-Work World”, in which he argued that the greatest disruption caused by artificial intelligence would not ultimately be economic but existential. “My argument there was that the coming crisis of AI is not fundamentally economic: it is existential,” Sanders said. Referring to the Austrian psychiatrist Viktor Frankl, he added: “Viktor Frankl described what happens when a civilisation’s anchor for human identity is removed: an ‘existential vacuum’, a suffocating meaninglessness that no material provision can address.” “Silicon Valley’s answer to the disruption of labour is what I called the ‘hollow utopia’: income to fund the body, and infinite digital distraction to occupy the mind,” Sanders said. He contrasted this with the vision presented in Magnifica Humanitas , arguing that the Pope had rejected the idea that efficiency or economic productivity alone can define human flourishing. “When he cites John Paul II in §129, asking whether AI makes human life on earth ‘more human’ in every aspect of that life and more worthy of man, he is insisting the criterion is not comfort or efficiency,” Sanders said. He also pointed to another section of the encyclical which states that “no computational system, however sophisticated, can create a heart that gives itself, or a conscience that discerns good from evil”. “The GDP era told us human value was about output,” Sanders said. “The encyclical says it never was.” Speaking about the implications of Magnifica Humanitas for Magisterium AI, Sanders said he wanted “to be careful not to appropriate it for our own promotional purposes”, but argued that the encyclical nevertheless addressed “something much larger than any single company”. He highlighted the line: “A more moral AI is not enough if that morality is determined by a few”, adding: “That sentence captures the structural reason Magisterium AI was built the way it was built.” Sanders insisted that “a general-purpose AI platform cannot be made Catholic simply by pointing its outputs at Catholic content”, because “the moral architecture of a system, who controls its training data, what its reward functions are optimised for, what the company that built it needs commercially, shapes every response it generates”. He added that Magisterium AI was built around what the company calls the “off-ramp”, explaining: “Catholic AI should answer a question and then send the person back into prayer, real relationships and the sacramental life of the Church. It should be designed to be finished with.” He also cited another line from the encyclical stating that “technology is never neutral, because it takes on the characteristics of those who devise, finance, regulate and use it”. Referring to the encyclical’s treatment of subsidiarity, he warned that many Church institutions presently rely on technologies controlled by corporations whose priorities may change without notice. “They are using tools built and governed by a handful of companies, running on infrastructure they neither own nor fully understand,” he said. Sanders recalled advice once given to him by the former Archbishop of Toronto, Cardinal Thomas Collins. “My former boss, Cardinal Thomas Collins, used to say: ‘If you know where you’re going, you’ll be more likely to get there.’” Near the conclusion, Sanders said: “The encyclical has sharpened the question of where Catholic institutions should be going with this technology. It has not done the building for us. “The work of constructing digital infrastructure that actually embodies these principles is still largely ahead of us. But the standard has been set.”

Politicians, bishops and technology leaders across the United States, Britain and Canada have begun responding to Pope Leo XIV’s first encyclical, Magnifica Humanitas The first international reactions to Pope Leo XIV’s inaugural encyclical have begun to emerge less than 24 hours after its publication, with bishops, politicians and technology figures across the United States, Britain and Canada welcoming the document’s warnings about the dangers posed by artificial intelligence. The encyclical, Magnifica Humanitas, was released by the Vatican on 25 May and is already being compared to Pope Leo XIII’s landmark 1891 social encyclical Rerum Novarum, which addressed the upheavals of the Industrial Revolution. Pope Leo XIV deliberately dated the text 15 May to coincide with the 135th anniversary of the earlier document. One of the strongest official political reactions came from the United States ambassador to the Holy See, Brian Burch, who praised the Vatican’s intervention in the growing global debate surrounding AI. “We welcome the Holy See’s important contribution to the subject of artificial intelligence,” Burch said. “The Vatican’s moral leadership on technology and human dignity contributes meaningfully to the global conversation on AI.” Burch said the United States shared the Holy See’s commitment to ensuring that artificial intelligence “serves humanity and upholds fundamental values”, while also defending the Trump administration’s emphasis on innovation and American leadership in the sector. “The United States is likewise committed to exporting American AI technologies built on principles of transparency, security and human flourishing, ensuring the world benefits from AI systems that reflect democratic values rather than authoritarian control,” he said. David Sacks, the technology investor and former White House AI adviser, also responded publicly to the encyclical, agreeing with the Pope’s argument that AI should remain a tool at the service of humanity rather than become an instrument of “domination or exclusion”. Writing on X, however, Sacks questioned how governments could be trusted with increased regulatory authority over artificial intelligence. “If we hand governments sweeping power over AI development in the name of safety, how do we prevent it from being used to censor, surveil and control citizens, as Orwell foretold in 1984?” he wrote. “This is the real alignment problem. The oldest questions of human nature and authority don’t disappear in the AI age. They become newly relevant.” The encyclical also drew praise from Democratic Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut, who said Pope Leo XIV had articulated growing concerns about the social and moral effects of artificial intelligence. “AI threatens to undermine the basic building blocks of humanity as it seeks to replace our most basic functions, like creativity, friendship and critical thinking,” Murphy wrote, describing the Pope’s warning against monopolisation of AI technologies by powerful corporations as “really important”. Catholic bishops throughout the English-speaking world moved quickly to welcome the document, presenting it as a major contribution to Catholic social teaching at a moment of rapid technological change. Archbishop Paul S. Coakley of Oklahoma City, president of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, said the Church in the United States received the encyclical “with gratitude and praise”. “It is a powerful reminder that no technology can replace a child of God, and all technology should be placed at the service of helping humanity thrive,” he said. Drawing parallels with Rerum Novarum, Archbishop Coakley said Pope Leo XIV had shone “the light of the Gospel and the tradition of the Church” on the opportunities and dangers created by artificial intelligence. “The Pope calls us to never lose sight of the inherent dignity of all human life and the moral imperative for technology to support peace and the common good rather than the limited interests of a few,” he said. The Archbishop also revealed that the US bishops’ conference had already tasked its doctrine committee with coordinating the Church’s response to developments in artificial intelligence. In England and Wales, Archbishop Richard Moth, president of the bishops’ conference, and the Archbishop of Westminster described the encyclical as “an important contribution to integral human development during a time of considerable change”. “One of the first interventions of Pope Leo since he was elected Pope was to draw attention to the profound challenges AI will bring to humanity,” Archbishop Moth said. The Archbishop of Westminster noted that the Church’s social teaching tradition since Rerum Novarum offered substantial guidance for navigating technological and economic upheaval. “We must respond to these, placing the centrality of humanity above all else, most especially the solidarity that is needed if we are to seek peace among peoples,” he said. “Pope Leo reminds us that ‘more powerful does not necessarily mean better.’” Archbishop Moth warned that technology “must not be used to embed unjust economic systems and abuses of power, but must always be at the service of human development”. He also disclosed that the Bishops’ Conference of England and Wales had established a working group to study the encyclical and examine the ethical issues generated by artificial intelligence. Other American bishops issued similar statements within hours of publication. Bishop Michael Burbidge of Arlington said the encyclical was especially welcome “in this time of tremendous social and technological change”. “I encourage all to join me over the coming days in reading Magnifica Humanitas in its entirety and prayerfully considering all that the Holy Father shares,” Bishop Burbidge said. Archbishop Richard Henning of Boston described the document as “timely and important”, while Archbishop Nelson Pérez of Philadelphia encouraged Catholics to reflect on its “vital message” concerning the protection of human dignity during rapid technological development. Bishop William Koenig of Wilmington, Delaware, said the encyclical drew upon the wisdom of Catholic social teaching to ensure that technological progress remained directed towards “human flourishing”. The Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops also welcomed the document, saying it offered guidance for protecting the human person during “a profound epochal shift”. The bishops highlighted the encyclical’s call for “a civilization of love founded on justice, dialogue and shared responsibility” as an alternative to what the Vatican described as “the culture of power and war”. However, a more critical reaction came from the Bishop Emeritus of Tyler, Bishop Joseph Strickland, who published a lengthy critique arguing that Magnifica Humanitas risked placing excessive emphasis on social structures and human flourishing at the expense of sin, repentance and salvation. While acknowledging the encyclical’s “strong and important” rejection of transhumanism and its warnings about “AI warfare, exploitation, digital manipulation and technological domination”, Bishop Strickland said the document devoted comparatively little attention to “original sin, concupiscence, personal repentance, moral culpability, judgment, hell, penance, or the eternal destiny of the soul”. Bishop Strickland argued that “the roots of evil begin to appear primarily structural rather than spiritual” and warned that the encyclical’s repeated calls for a “civilization of love” risked sounding “less like the fruit of conversion to Christ and more like a global humanitarian project centred on fraternity, solidarity, inclusion and peace”. The former Bishop of Tyler said many Catholics would find the document “deeply unsettling” because “the entire framework is subtly shifting: from God-centredness to man-centredness, from salvation to human flourishing, from sin to systems”. He concluded by warning against “religious humanism” and insisting that “the answer remains what it has always been: Jesus Christ, King of kings and Lord of lords.”

Magnifica Humanitas is far more than an encyclical on artificial intelligence. Michael Haynes finds that Pope Leo XIV’s first major text offers a window into the moral vision shaping his pontificate With the launch of his first encyclical there is now no doubt that Leo’s choice of regnal name and entire papacy is centred around what he sees as a pivotal moment for the future of the Church and humanity. “Artificial intelligence needs to be disarmed,” said Leo XIV while launching Magnifica Humanitas today. “This moment needs words capable of attracting attention, of awakening consciences.” This is not to say that Leo opposes the seemingly relentless drive of artificial intelligence (AI) or the wider technological development of the modern world. While AI cannot be deemed “morally neutral”, Leo urged that “it must be at the service of all and the common good”. In short, this could be taken as a summation of the entire encyclical : a plea for the pursuit of the common good. It is certainly written as a response to AI and describes itself as being in the “age of AI”. But it is much wider than AI itself, as Leo appeared to launch his pontificate anew. Just as during his address to the College of Cardinals last May he outlined his papal priorities, in Magnifica Humanitas Leo revealed his deeper concerns about wider society. Given the length of the encyclical, no single analysis can justly summarise all that it contains, but one key element to examine first is what the text reveals about the Pontiff’s moral compass and his view of addressing crises in the Church and wider secular society. Far from being a mere appeal from another cleric for some generically responsible behaviour, this time regarding AI, Leo delved into the entire foundation of societal life. For Leo, the link between his encyclical and his namesake’s Rerum Novarum is palpable. “Like the earlier Leo, I feel entrusted to look upon another huge transformation with eyes of faith, with lucidity of reason, with openness to mystery, and with cries of the poor and the earth resounding in my heart,” he commented during the launch event. This is why Magnifica Humanitas does not deal briefly and solely with AI, but instead uses the topic to launch into a wider schooling of society about improving standards of behaviour and acting in a more Christian manner while seeking the common good. Leo’s assessment of how to preserve humanity from the dangers posed by AI is to attempt a ground-up re-education of society with God at the centre. In part this explains the considerable length of the text, which will have disappointed those looking for a return to briefer tomes. Of the 245 paragraphs and 224 footnotes, Pope Francis is cited 54 times, Benedict XVI 16 times, John Paul II nearly 40 times, and the Second Vatican Council 13 times. St Augustine also features throughout, with a quotation drawn from J.R.R. Tolkien. The tone is a mixture of different elements. Firstly, it is undeniably clear that Leo is seeking to address the result of many years of increasingly anti-Catholic secularism. “We live at a time of significant spiritual and cultural blindness,” he stated. In order to resolve this crisis, a crisis which then spills over into the use of AI, Leo urges society to return to elements intrinsic to Christian civilisation, such as pursuing the common good. “In the era of artificial intelligence, when human dignity is threatened by new forms of dehumanization, ours is the pressing duty to remain profoundly human,” he writes. “We must lovingly safeguard the grandeur of humanity bestowed upon us and revealed in its fullness in Christ, the splendour of which no machine can ever replace.” His approach to how best to use AI thus necessarily involves a quasi-catechesis on the re-Christianisation of society. Leo decried how “the risk of dehumanization — of building a future that excludes God and reduces the other to a means — is an ancient and ever-new temptation that today takes on a technical guise”. Should AI and wider technological development continue in the line of the Tower of Babel, then all will suffer, Leo argued. “Babel thus reveals the limits of any effort that, however grandiose, arises from self-affirmation, sacrifices human dignity for efficiency and aspires to reach heaven without God’s blessing.” “What saves humanity,” he added later in the encyclical, “is the divine love that descends into the most fragile point of our history and renews it from within.” The Pontiff urged all readers to recognise “the harmony that arises when all persons assume their own role and recognize that their strength comes from the Lord”. Such lines present a decidedly Christian tone to the text, if perhaps not a stridently or overtly Catholic one. It reads as Leo’s heartfelt appeal to the world at large to act in a more polite, respectful and ultimately Christian manner. “In order to protect the human person in the age of artificial intelligence, I believe that today we must once again reflect on the common good, the universal destination of goods, subsidiarity, solidarity and social justice,” wrote Leo, having noted that “a city founded on the common good implies, first and foremost, building on a firm relationship with God”. At other times the text seems less unabashedly Catholic than a papal encyclical ought confidently to appear. In large part this is due to the Pope’s reiteration of his predecessor’s text Dignitas Infinita regarding human dignity, and an underlying tone in the text which appears to orient the Pope’s proposed societal changes as being chiefly desirable because they benefit man, rather than being linked to a conversion of hearts and minds to Catholicism. Assuredly, in certain sections the Pope notes the importance of having God at the foundation of activity, but in others a far more secular tone is present. Modern teaching on human dignity tends to upend traditional teaching, generally remaining silent on supernatural dignity and then elevating natural dignity. For a more detailed analysis on the topic than is possible here, see this correspondent’s article and book on the topic. Citing this teaching on human dignity, Leo writes that it is this which “requires us to shape the way we live together, including our economic and political choices, and the makeup of our cities”. Yet such an aspect is also very much in line with Leo’s papal style: avoiding polemics, and outwardly remaining calm as he seeks to find common ground with all in an apparent attempt to defuse tensions and foster peaceful dialogue. This does not stop him from once again decrying abortion and euthanasia. Nor did Leo feel restrained in making a bold statement declaring that the Church’s longstanding teaching on a “just war” is “now outdated” since “humanity possesses far more effective and capable tools for promoting human life and resolving conflicts, such as dialogue, diplomacy and forgiveness”. Indeed, this latter point places his repeated calls for peace in a new light, given that, for Leo, it appears that armed conflict can no longer be justified, a pronouncement which is not supported either by Scripture or Tradition. For an encyclical billed as being solely about AI, the text delivers far more than that. It reads as a window into Leo’s moral and social views and thus into the style and priorities of his pontificate. Vaticanists waiting for a “tell” on Leo have finally been granted an inside look. Leo highlights the Christian foundation of society before noting that only Christianity can lead society and mankind to truly flourish. He then moves to address questions relating to the common good, alongside topics likely to interest more secular readers, including his passionate appeals regarding armed conflict and the growing use of AI in fuelling the global war industry. But in closing he returns once more to his overtly Christian theme, emphasising the importance of prayer in sustaining any endeavour aimed at fostering a better society in pursuit of the common good. “The spirituality that we need,” he wrote, “is a Eucharistic spirituality, that is, a spirituality of ecclesial unity in love.” Leo urged society to recognise the beauty that comes not from AI’s takeover of the world, or even man himself through transhumanism, but from the frailty of humanity which must rely upon God for everything. “Our rule,” he concluded, “must be the acceptance of human limitations as a natural and positive reality, and should be characterized by shared responsibility and a language characterized by the Gospel.” Michael Haynes is an English journalist in the Holy See Press Corps. He serves as Vatican Correspondent and Analyst for Pelican+ , while readers can follow him at Per Mariam and on X @MLJHaynes .

Pope Leo XIV has published the first encyclical of his pontificate, warning that artificial intelligence risks creating a new “Tower of Babel” built on technocratic power, dehumanisation and moral confusion Pope Leo XIV has published the first encyclical of his pontificate, issuing a warning against the dangers posed by artificial intelligence and what he describes as a growing “culture of power” threatening the dignity of the human person. Magnifica Humanitas (“Magnificent Humanity”), released by the Vatican on 25 May after being held under strict embargo until late Monday morning in Rome, is the Holy Father’s most substantial intervention yet in the global debate surrounding AI and the technological transformation of society. The encyclical argues that humanity now stands between two paths: the construction of a new “Tower of Babel” founded on pride, uniformity and technocratic power, or the rebuilding of a new Jerusalem grounded in solidarity, communion and God-centred human fraternity. “Humanity, created by God in all its grandeur, is today facing a pivotal choice: either to construct a new Tower of Babel or to build the city in which God and humanity dwell together,” the Pope writes in the opening paragraphs of the encyclical. The 230-paragraph document is the first major social encyclical of Leo XIV’s pontificate and immediately places him within the long tradition of modern Catholic social teaching stretching back to Pope Leo XIII’s Rerum Novarum in 1891. Far from rejecting technological progress outright, Leo XIV repeatedly insists that technology is a fundamentally human achievement capable of serving the common good. However, he warns that technological systems can never be considered morally neutral and must remain subordinate to the dignity of the human person. “We cannot consider AI to be morally neutral,” the Pope states. The encyclical presents artificial intelligence as one of the defining res novae — “new things” — confronting the modern world, the language traditionally used by the Church to describe the upheavals of the industrial revolution. The document states that unprecedented technological power is increasingly concentrated in the hands of private actors operating beyond effective political oversight, creating new dangers for democracy, labour, truth and peace. “More power does not necessarily imply something better,” it states. Much of the encyclical is devoted to explaining why the Church believes artificial intelligence cannot be equated with human intelligence. The Pope insists that AI systems, however sophisticated, remain incapable of moral reasoning, authentic relationships or genuine human experience. “So-called artificial intelligences do not undergo experiences, do not possess a body, do not feel joy or pain,” the encyclical says. “Nor do they have a moral conscience.” Leo XIV repeatedly returns to the theme of human dignity, grounding the entire encyclical in the belief that every person possesses an “infinite dignity” rooted in creation in the image of God rather than in usefulness, efficiency or productivity. “The fundamental dignity of each person,” he writes, “is neither acquired nor earned, nor does it need to be justified.” The Pope warns that the unchecked growth of AI risks creating new forms of dehumanisation in which human beings are valued according to economic output, algorithmic usefulness or digital visibility. He cautions against reducing human judgement to automated systems and criticises cultural movements that treat technological transcendence as a substitute for spiritual fulfilment. One of the most striking sections of the document is its sustained critique of transhumanist and posthumanist ideologies, which seek to overcome biological limitations through technological enhancement. Without naming particular movements or figures, Leo XIV argues that such projects reflect humanity’s recurring temptation to seek salvation apart from God. “Babel thus reveals the limits of any effort that, however grandiose, arises from self-affirmation, sacrifices human dignity for efficiency and aspires to reach heaven without God’s blessing,” the encyclical says. The encyclical also addresses the growing political and social consequences of AI-generated misinformation and manipulated media. Leo XIV warns that artificial intelligence is rapidly transforming the public square and undermining trust in democratic institutions through the spread of falsehoods and synthetic content. “Disinformation finds a powerful amplifier in AI,” the document states. The Pope argues that truth itself must be defended as a “common good” and calls for what he describes as an “ecology of communication” rooted in responsibility, education and human relationships rather than manipulation and profit. “The search for truth is an essential element of democracy,” he writes. Questions surrounding labour and the future of work occupy another substantial portion of the encyclical. Leo XIV warns against economic systems that prioritise efficiency over workers and expresses concern about automation displacing millions of people while weakening social bonds and family life. The Pope also calls for stronger political oversight of AI systems, greater international cooperation and safeguards against the monopolisation of data and digital infrastructure. In one of the encyclical’s most arresting phrases, Leo XIV urges world leaders to “disarm AI”. “Disarming AI means freeing it from the mentality of ‘armed’ competition,” the Pope writes, warning against an escalating technological arms race between states and corporations. The document devotes an extended section to the dangers posed by autonomous weapons systems and the growing use of AI in warfare. Leo XIV argues that artificial intelligence is accelerating the pace and destructiveness of conflict while distancing human beings from moral responsibility for violence. “AI acts as an accelerating factor” in changing the nature of war, he writes. The Pope condemns what he calls the “normalisation of war” and criticises a global culture increasingly resigned to permanent conflict, weakened diplomacy and the collapse of multilateral institutions. “This culture of power infiltrates society,” he warns, “normalising war.” Despite the encyclical’s sombre tone, the document concludes on a strongly hopeful note centred on the Christian doctrine of the Incarnation. Against ideologies promising technological transcendence, Leo XIV points to Christ as the true fulfilment of humanity. “At the heart of everything is the mystery of the Incarnation, the Word who became flesh and dwelt among us,” he writes. The final pages call on Catholics to resist despair and instead help build what the Pope repeatedly describes as a “civilisation of love” capable of directing technological progress towards authentic human flourishing. “In the era of artificial intelligence,” the Pope writes, “when human dignity is threatened by new forms of dehumanisation, ours is the pressing duty to remain profoundly human.”

The Vatican has confirmed the release date, title and theme of Pope Leo XIV’s first encyclical The release date for Pope Leo XIV’s first encyclical has been confirmed as May 25. The title of the document has been confirmed as Magnifica Humanitas, and it will focus on preserving the human person in the age of artificial intelligence, according to Vatican News. Although the text will not be released until May 25, it will be signed on May 15, matching the date of the signing and publication of Rerum Novarum, Pope Leo XIII’s best-known encyclical, issued on May 15, 1891. The same date was also chosen in 1931 by Pope Pius XI for Quadragesimo Anno, which developed the Church’s teaching on social order and introduced the principle of subsidiarity. Thirty years later, on May 15, 1961, Pope John XXIII promulgated Mater et Magistra, focusing on economic justice and social development. May 25 also coincides with Pope St John Paul II’s Ut Unum Sint, on ecumenism, which was released on May 25, 1995, and Pope Leo XIII’s Annum Sacrum, released on May 25, 1899, which consecrated the entire human race to the Sacred Heart of Jesus. Magnifica Humanitas will be presented at 11.30am in the Vatican’s Synod Hall. Alongside the Pope, a number of significant prelates, theologians and specialists are scheduled to speak. They include Cardinal Víctor Manuel Fernández, prefect of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith; Cardinal Michael Czerny SJ, prefect of the Dicastery for Promoting Integral Human Development; Prof Anna Rowlands, a theologian and professor at Durham University; Christopher Olah, co-founder of Anthropic and head of research on the interpretability of artificial intelligence; and Prof Leocadie Lushombo IT, professor of political theology and Catholic social thought at the Jesuit School of Theology at Santa Clara University in California. Closing remarks will be given by Cardinal Secretary of State Pietro Parolin, followed by an address and blessing by the Pope. Addressing artificial intelligence, the encyclical will build on recent Vatican interest in the subject. In January 2025, the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith and the Dicastery for Culture and Education issued Antiqua et Nova, a joint note on “the relationship between artificial intelligence and human intelligence”. The document said AI could bring “important innovations” but warned that it also carried the danger of deepening inequality, manipulating public opinion and expanding “the instruments of war well beyond the scope of human oversight”. It added that artificial intelligence “should not be seen as an artificial form of human intelligence, but as a product of it”, and insisted that it “should be used only as a tool to complement human intelligence rather than replace its richness”.