Pope Leo XIV Takes on the Silicon Valley Oligarchy

Pope Leo XIV Issues Encyclical on Artificial Intelligence and Human Dignity

Pope Leo XIV released his first encyclical, titled Magnifica Humanitas, on Monday. The document, approximately 42,000 words in length, addresses the development of artificial intelligence and its implications for human persons, society, and moral order. The text states its primary subject as “safeguarding the human person in the time of artificial intelligence.”

The encyclical opens by contrasting its title, which translates as “the magnificence of humanity,” with what it describes as a “new Tower of Babel.” It draws on the earlier encyclical Rerum Novarum issued by Pope Leo XIII in 1891 during the period of industrialization. Leo XIV states that he selected his papal name in reference to that predecessor’s focus on social questions arising from technological and economic change. In an address to cardinals after his election, he noted that the church’s social teaching offers resources for responding to “another industrial revolution and the developments of artificial intelligence, which pose new challenges for the defense of human dignity, justice, and work.”

The new encyclical affirms two continuing insights from Rerum Novarum: the priority of human labor over approaches centered exclusively on finance or output, and the connection between the proclamation of the Gospel and efforts toward a just social order. It observes that many conditions of the late nineteenth century have changed, yet these principles retain relevance for contemporary questions of work and economic life.

On artificial intelligence, the document states that the technology imitates certain functions of human intelligence but does not possess sentience. It explains that such systems “do not undergo experiences, do not possess a body, do not feel joy or pain, do not mature through relationships and do not know from within what love, work, friendship or responsibility mean.” The text adds that they lack a moral conscience because they do not judge good and evil or bear responsibility for outcomes.

The encyclical calls for artificial intelligence to be directed away from uses that could function as instruments of domination or exclusion. It rejects approaches described as transhumanist or posthumanist that seek to overcome human limits through technological means alone. The document distinguishes between integrating technology within a framework centered on human relations and adopting an outlook that treats technical advancement as a form of salvation. It states that acceptance of human finitude allows recognition of the dignity of persons and opens possibilities for relationship with others and with God.

The text expresses concern that artificial intelligence could intensify difficulties in establishing shared truth, which it describes as essential to democratic processes oriented toward the common good. It warns that when questions of truth lose force and decisions rest solely on apparent utility, democratic life weakens. The encyclical notes that democracy requires concordance with facts and commitment to the good of individuals and society; indifference to truth can lead toward forms of authoritarian control.

Additional sections address the effects of digital platforms on children and adolescents. The document states that early exposure to social media can affect sleep, attention, emotional regulation, and relationships. It identifies risks including grooming, the creation of deceptive images, cyberbullying, and algorithmic promotion of violent or sexualized content.

The encyclical acknowledges potential benefits of technology in removing repetitive, dangerous, or physically demanding tasks and in providing support for human activity. It states, however, that the pursuit of profit does not justify systematic elimination of employment, because persons are ends in themselves and economic arrangements must remain ordered to human dignity. It calls for an economy that values the dignity of work.

The document also discusses financial instruments detached from productive activity. It cites earlier papal statements that finance pursued for its own sake, apart from moral considerations, has produced documented abuses, injustices, and periodic crises affecting multiple economies. It notes the importance of maintaining regulatory frameworks that connect financial activity to real economic purposes.

A section addresses historical involvement of members of the church in the slave trade and slavery. The text places this acknowledgment within a broader discussion of labor conditions in parts of the digital economy. It describes tasks such as data labeling, model training, and content moderation, often performed for low wages under demanding conditions, and notes that many workers in these roles are young and female. It further refers to extraction of rare-earth minerals under physically taxing circumstances in several countries. The encyclical characterizes these patterns as arising from a technocratic outlook that treats persons primarily as resources for optimization and subordinates other considerations to efficiency.

On questions of international order, the encyclical criticizes views that treat armed conflict as an unavoidable feature of human affairs and that dismiss sustained efforts at diplomacy and institutional cooperation. It describes how religious or identity-based extremism, combined with certain economic policies and the spread of misinformation, can foster perceptions of diversity as a threat and contribute to cycles of domination and resentment. The text presents these observations as general tendencies rather than attributions to specific governments or leaders.

The encyclical concludes with an invitation to members of the church and the wider human community to engage in listening and dialogue. It presents the church’s social teaching as one contribution among others to reflection on technological change, without claiming exclusive authority over technical or policy questions. The document emphasizes that its observations are offered in a spirit of collaboration rather than as final prescriptions.

Throughout the text, Leo XIV returns to the principle that technological systems should remain instruments serving human persons rather than defining the ends of human life. The encyclical does not name individual companies, executives, or political figures. Its arguments are framed in terms of general principles drawn from prior church teaching and applied to developments in artificial intelligence, digital communication, and related economic practices.