Magnifica Humanitas (Magnificent Humanity): On Safeguarding the Human Person in the Time of Artificial Intelligence

by Pope Leo XIV

Prima Enciclica di Papa Leone XIV, dedicata alla custodia della dignità e del valore della persona umana nella nostra epoca, segnata dall’avvento dell’intelligenza artificiale. Un testo atteso in tutto il mondo da moltissimi lettori per l’autorevolezza del Magistero Pontificio e per l’attualità della tematica, che ormai tocca quotidianamente la vita di ciascuno.

Genres: Religion, Nonfiction, Philosophy, Theology, Catholic, Christianity, Politics

192 pages, Paperback

First published May 25, 2026

About the author

The first Augustinian Pope, Leo XIV is the second Roman Pontiff - after Pope Francis - from the Americas. Unlike Jorge Mario Bergoglio, however, the former Robert Francis Prevost is from the northern part of the continent, though he spent many years as a missionary in Peru before being elected head of the Augustinians for two consecutive terms. In Peru, he served as Bishop of Chiclayo from 2015-2023. He was made a cardinal by Pope Francis in 2023 and was elected to the papacy after Francis' death on May 8, 2025. His papal name, Leo, was chosen in honor of Pope Leo XIII

Reviews

[Kalee Probasco · Rating 5 out of 5]

brb gonna go be profoundly human

[Ryan Turnbull · Rating 5 out of 5]

This slaps.

[readee v. wilbury · Rating 4 out of 5]

not a huge fan of the teleological view of history, but he’s the pope so that comes w the territory. not a Cat myself, but happy to see someone is saying something. bro might’ve read Ellul—from paragraph 112:

“When efficiency becomes the ultimate measure of value, human beings are tempted to see themselves as a project to be optimized rather than as persons called to relationship and communion.”


not necessarily Ellul coded, but check this out, paragraph 178:

“colonialism assumes new forms. It no longer dominates only bodies, but appropriates data, transforming personal lives into exploitable information.  Entire regions, especially those marked by structural fragility and limited geopolitical relevance, are currently subjected to a new mindset of extraction: that of health data, epidemiological profiles, genetic maps and demographic information.”

also says “just war” theory is outdated

basedbasedbasedbased

[Analia · Rating 4 out of 5]

4/5 ⭐

No estaba en el mood para leer literatura teológica/espiritual pero se me venía cruzando en las redes sociales su portada, frases y decidí leerla. No pensé que me iba a gustar, de hecho en las primeras páginas le decía yo al libro: “esto es utopía León” y león a las pocas páginas me decía: “la Iglesia es capaz de ofrecer a la sociedad un signo creíble: porque buscar juntos el bien de todos, en la corresponsabilidad y en la fraternidad, no es una utopía, sino una posibilidad real.” Así que, me terminó encantando.
Algo que me sorprendió fue el uso repetitivo de la palabra “interpelar” como algo positivo: la Iglesia y su Doctrina Social han sabido dejarse interpelar y el Papa pide continuar así en virtud de los tiempos que corren.
Con una introducción más cinco (5) capítulos y en virtud del 135° aniversario por la publicación de la la Encíclica Rerum novarum en 1891 por León XIII, nuestro actual Papa León XIV decide con ésta su primer encíclica hacer un repaso de lo que su querido Predecesor impulsó: “aquella reflexión sobre la sociedad, la economía y la política que hoy llamamos “Doctrina social de la Iglesia”. Digo repaso porque es lo que hace trayendo y enseñando (en lo personal) las diferentes encíclicas que sus predecesores escribieron en relación con la doctrina y la cuestión social.
La Encíclica parte de la comparación de dos lógicas opuestas, que (cito al Papa León XIV) "ya he evocado con imágenes bíblicas: por un lado, la tentación de construir la torre de Babel, confiando en el poder y en el orgullo; por otro, la paciencia de reconstruir Jerusalén, como en tiempos de Nehemías, “pieza por pieza”, cuidando lo humano y el bien común."

Sin dudas que el tema central es la Inteligencia Artificial pero a lo largo de 245 puntos nos la presenta no como algo aislado sino en relación con las grandes cuestiones sociales: política, economía, trabajo, familia, educación y paz, a la luz de la era digital.
Tiene profundas reflexiones cuyo hincapié es que el hombre puede beneficiarse de la revolución digital y no sea cosa de unos pocos: «pocos tienen demasiado y demasiados tienen poco, esta es la lógica de hoy». También distingue entre inteligencia artificial e inteligencia humana: La primera “no tiene una conciencia moral: no juzgan el bien y el mal, no captan el sentido último de las situaciones ni asumen el peso de las consecuencias. Pueden imitar lenguajes, comportamientos, valoraciones; pueden simular empatía o comprensión, pero no conocen lo que producen, porque no residen en el horizonte afectivo, relacional y espiritual en el que el ser humano se vuelve sabio.” Y recuerda en varios puntos algo que dijo San Pablo VI cuando nos advertía: “realmente las conquistas de la ciencia y de la técnica, desvinculadas del progreso moral y social, terminan por volverse contra el hombre.”

En Conclusión: Léanlo. Obviamente está presente la Eucaristía, la Virgen María y citas bíblicas invitando a las generaciones jóvenes a hacer un uso responsable no solo a nivel individual sino colectivo. No quiero dejar pasar la mención a otros temas como el coste en vidas y pobreza, la esclavitud moderna (trata de personas, robo de identidad, etc.) y la guerra. Sobre ésta última dice el Papa: “La Santa Sede (...) reconoce la actual debilidad de la ONU y del sistema político internacional, revela la necesidad de reformas profundas: no se trata sólo de ajustes técnicos, porque la crisis de convicciones y de valores afecta también a los fundamentos éticos de la vida de las naciones y dificulta orientar el multilateralismo hacia el verdadero bien común.”

[Andrew Kanne]

Happy to report that Pope Leo slapped with this one. A call to arms that is at time challenging to see the way forward, but he constantly is reminding and encouraging in the Hope of the Gospel. I am looking forward to revisiting to go back and recapture some of the nuggets I enjoyed particularly. The first and last sentences were bangers along with paragraphs 118-120, 232.

[Jenny Yohannan]

Main Takeaways:

- Pope Leo uses The Social Doctrine as a basis for his writing
- Social doctrine: “an exemplary practice (where the church) … when faced with historical changes, exercises her right and duty to examine social realities… and indicate paths for finding just solutions”; it is a dialogue with history, cultures and sciences that has unchanging truths.
- Principles of SD: inalienable dignity of the human person, the common good, universal destination of goods, subsidiarity, solidarity and social justice
- The Social Doctrine is not a spontaneous product of the modern age but was birthed through having to deal with the new things of the times (capital/labor conflict, workforce, economical and social transformations)
- It was written to find a way to seek wisdom in a living doctrine that “remains faithful to the Gospel while growing in response to the ‘new things’ of every era’”
- Highlighted the dignity of workers, fair wages and the idea that people have a fundamental value besides capital and profit
- There is no authentic evangelization that doesn’t also affect the structures of human society
- Denounces the concentration of economic power in the hands of the few and criticizes projects that undermine the freedom and responsibility of the individual
- SD is a conscience for the Church
- Recognizes that organized forms of society are safeguards for civil equilibrium and for protecting the common good and how true democracy is a means for ensuring proper exercises of authority
- Essentially, there is a need for law to take precedence over interests, economic disparities are grounds for tension and violence, and there is a need for mediation between the individual and the State
- State must provide support for the marginalized while also not impeding on individual freedom or responsibility
- Social doctrine implores us to discover our duty to implement the common good in our daily lives
- SD brings us to the heart of our faith: that God, “revealed in Jesus, is love itself in relationship” and that we are called to communion with God that can be discovered through self-giving
- The value of persons “does not depend on what they achieve or produce”, it is a given to being human
- Community is called to protect and promote human rights as it is an expression of intrinsic human dignity
- We should be able to act freely as much as possible, without harming the common good
- We should not allow a handful of actors to dictate safeguard processes on their own
- Faith invites us to live in solidarity and think and act in terms of community
- Social justice is being shaped by digital technologies - it changes the way we obtain information, communicate and access services
- It is important to regulate technology to combat hate/misinformation
- Technology advancements can foster participation in inequality, control, exclusion
- The BIG question: “do technological innovations truly help individuals and peoples to become more human and fraternal, while respecting our common home and future generations?” - all tech advancements should be evaluated under this question
- Human intelligence guides tech innovations and responsibly determines their use and limits
- We all have a limited understanding of AI’s actual functioning, even those who “created” it
- current AI systems are more cultivated than built, they design the framework in which intelligence grows
- Some fundamental scientific aspects remain unknown, therefore there is an urgent need for a deepening of scientific research on the topic and an exercise of moral and spiritual discernment
- AI merely imitates certain functions of human intelligence tied to data processing
- “Do not undergo experiences, do not possess a body, do not feel joy or pain… do not know from within what love, work, friendship or responsibility mean” - their learning is a form of statistical adaptation not indicating inner growth
- There is valuable use in AI but it requires vigilance
- Harmful uses of AI include manipulation of information and violations of privacy, also a danger when these systems are presented as neutral and objective when there are ideological biases
- AI is not morally neutral
- Responsibility must be emboldened in EVERY stage
- Important to discuss ethical frameworks and subject them “to the shared standards of social justice”
- AI must be “disarmed, welcoming and accessible”
- Humanity often flourishes through limitation, not just despite them
- Issues with AI: amplifies disinformation through manipulating content and exposing people to biased or misleading perspectives
- Truth of facts requires verification, cross-checking of sources and responsible argumentation
- Another issue: technological advancements have the significant ability to influence cultural change. As a result, people believe they can construct reality and whatever best suits their claim to truth
- “Communication is not only the transmission of information, but it is also the creation of a culture” - Digital environments shape how people perceive the world
- We are severely unprepared for technological advancements from an educational perspective - allows youth to be vulnerable to degrading content and makes it difficult for parents
- Lack of education causes dehumanization and stops development for critical and creative thought
- AI is rapidly transforming the workplace, it is important to keep humans at the center of design of systems
- He touches on unemployment and how AI might cause jobs to disappear
- Economy should value human dignity
- Talks about how digital revolution is changing the nature of conflict/war - cyberattacks, information manipulation, influencing campaigns
- Civilization of love - we must denounce evil, spread the Gospel, preserve in doing good, protect the vulnerable, opens paths to reconciliation; peace is found through justice so we must seek justice, we must engage in a dialogue in order to promote this
- Normalization of war and its relationship with “loss of historical memory”, which leads to a selective/distorted rewriting of the past
- AI and weapons
- Word became flesh -> dwells among us, we need to embody humanity
- Remain faithful to the truth, put God at the center of our lives, invest in education, cultivate relationships, love both justice and peace, let us be weavers of hope in our world (allow God’s Kingdom to take shape and share who we are and what we have)
- Pope Leo focuses on two images within the Bible: the Tower of Babel (dehumanizes and does not give reverence to God) and the rebuilding of Jerusalem (with Nehemiah’s direction to build the city back up with shared responsibility); he essentially uses these stories as a parallel to our choices to use technology/advancements
- Technology is never neutral - there are a lot of social and political effects to technology
- Building towards the common good
- Human dignity is being threatened by new forms of dehumanization - our duty is to remain human - safeguard humanity
- Humanity is something that no machine can ever replace
- We should place God at the forefront of our actions and humans at the center of our choices
- Abandon the Tower of Babel and choose to build up the common good
- God desires to dwell within the human heart, not a technological advancement where God is not revered
- AI as a development that challenges the categories of the social doctrine
- Church walks alongside of humanity, cannot be a stranger to the forces shaping society
- The Church actively participates in the processes where society grows and is organized
- God upholds the freedom of men and women
- Requires spiritual discernment to do so
- The function of the Social Doctrine serves as a foundation for collective discernment, again it is a process
- The Church must make its voice heard when injustice occurs, in order to promote communion
- Common good can be pursued with everyone’s contribution and it is the states responsibility to ensure cohesion
- In today’s age, we must include new forms of property (patents, algorithms, digital platforms, technological infrastructure and data) among universal goods
- Regulate tech to respect the environment, avoid waste, prevent new forms of exploitation

[Iris · Rating 5 out of 5]

a boldly elaborate and beautifully constructed insight into what it means to be human, worth anyone's time

[William Lockett]

The Pope is indeed still Catholic.

As someone who is not Catholic, there’s some areas where there’s naturally going to be disagreement, particularly sections on economics and war, as one cannot expect the Pope to not say the Catholic thing on these subjects. I did think this was worth the read just because of the media attention it received. I think there is something valuable about the fact that the secular world and people of other Christian and non-Christian cares about what the papacy has to say and it’s something that magisterial Protestants should seek to recover.

Personally I found rerum novarum more compelling, but the sections against trans humanism, particularly the section on human suffering (p. 120) as something integral to being human, were very strong.

[Mónica BQ · Rating 5 out of 5]

La situación es tal que aquí estoy, estando de acuerdo, e incluso aplaudiendo, con lo que un papa católico explica. Una lectura preciosa, actual e imperdible. No tengo ninguna fe en un ser superior, y me rehuso a darle participación a una religión organizada en mi vida, pero es también imposible no entender lo que León XIV explica sobre el futuro de la humanidad.

Hoy nuestra relación con la vida parece estar en crisis. Todo lo que representa un “límite” —incapacidad, enfermedad, ancianidad, sufrimiento, vulnerabilidad— tiende a ser leído principalmente como un defecto que hay que corregir, más que como un espacio en el que el ser humano madura y se abre a la relación. En cambio, debemos recordar que el ser humano no florece a pesar del límite, sino a menudo a través del límite. Una visión de la realidad a la luz de la fe ayuda a reconocer lo que llamamos “contingencia” de las cosas de este mundo. Si por un lado es necesario tratar de eliminar el sufrimiento que marca la vida humana, por el otro, es sabio reconocer nuestra finitud constitutiva.

[Charlie]

I think I had the wrong expectations going into this with the amount of news I saw about Leo condemning AI; In reality it provided a more nuanced analysis of the capacity for abuse by those with control over it. I think if he had come out and said ‘Thou shalt not make a machine in the likeness of a human mind’ as was written in the orange catholic bible of Dune it would certainly have turned more heads but in the modern era he doesn’t have the power to make it true so it would have been empty words. By choosing instead to target the systems that are allowing AI to be used to subjugate the people I feel people will be more willing to hear the message and reflect on what it means. Obviously if you’re not catholic it will be slightly harder to reflect on his words as there was plenty about how it must be done while thinking about god but I do think the core message is universal and I hope that by positioning the influence of the Catholic Church against the abuse of working people Pope Leo will be able to make at least some change.

[Matthew McConnell · Rating 5 out of 5]

What a gift to the Church this teaching is.

Some highlights:

“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.”

“Technological innovations, including artificial intelligence, are not neutral for they can either foster Stier participation and justice or exacerbate inequality, control, and exclusion. For this reason, they must be evaluated by asking a crucial question: do they truly help individuals and peoples to become more human and fraternal, respecting our common home and future generations?”

“We cannot consider AI to be morally neutral.”

“Our central question [is]: what does it mean to safeguard our humanity?… when efficiency becomes the ultimate measure of value, human beings are attempted to see themselves as a project to be optimized rather than as persons called to relationship, and communion.”

“Ultimately, the key question remains the one posed by Saint John Paul II: does AI ‘make human life on earth ‘more human’ in every aspect of that life? Does it make it more worthy of man?’”

“The pervasiveness of digital media fosters a culture of immediacy and hyper-stimulation, which gives rise to fatigue, boredom and apathy concerning the effort required for seeking the truth.”

“Educating people about the use of AI, then, involves teaching them to decide when and for what purpose it ought not to be used. The speed and ease with which answers or summaries can be obtained at risk extinguishing the desire to ask questions, which is a process that bears for only over time.”

“The subtler forms of addiction linked to the ‘digital attention economy’ should not be underestimated, since platforms and services are often designed to capture users’ time and attention, exploiting their vulnerabilities and weakening their inner freedom.”

“What saves humanity is the divine love that descends into the most fragile point of our history and renews it from within. For this reason, as a believer among believers, I invite everyone to contemplate, in the face of the Son of God, the grandeur of humanity that shines a light also on the era of AI. In Christ, we are called to cooperate in the work of creation, rather than be disinterested, observers of tech, technological processes that limit our freedom and responsibility.”

“In the humble fidelity of daily life, even the era of AI can become a time in which the Holy Spirit brings about the civilization of love in our lives. Indeed, the Lord continues to make all things new and offers every era the possibility of becoming part of salvation history in the light of the Incarnation.”

I mainly focused on sharing quotes pertaining to Pope Leo’s teaching on AI, but there is a lot more in this document worth reading and reflecting on, especially in relation to war in the modern era. May the good and gracious Lord use these words to help us to never forget the grandeur of humanity!

[Nathan Simon · Rating 5 out of 5]

Leooooooooooo

[lynns · Rating 4 out of 5]

woke popeeeee

Quite a beautiful and poetic encyclical that explores protecting human consciousness in the age of AI. It shares a good amount of common ground with classical socialist/Marxist texts and even Donna Haraway’s Cyborg Manifesto in its critique of surveillance/exploitation of labor/class disparities.

Similar to Pope Leo XIII’s Rerum Novarum during the Industrial Revolution, Pope Leo XIV’s focus is more on the unchecked power of global tech monopolies rather than the vision of a worker-led revolution…womp womp

Even though it is a refreshing read from a world leader, it is difficult to reconcile the deep nuance of this piece with the reality that the same author does not believe in the validity of LGBTQ+ relationships.

A few quotes I loved:
“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.”

“Even today, colonialism assumes new forms. It no longer dominates only bodies, but appropriates data, transforming personal lives into exploitable information…If technology promises emancipation, yet
produces new forms of global subordination, it stands in contradiction to the fundamental principle of human dignity.”

“Nothing in the world of Al is immaterial or magical.
Every seemingly immediate and flawless response is the result of a long chain of mediation, involving vast networks of natural resources, energy infrastructure and, above all, people.”

[Manuel Alfonseca · Rating 4 out of 5]

ESPAÑOL: Importante encíclica que plantea muchas cuestiones que ya son esenciales o lo serán pronto para nuestra vida diaria, debido a los avances tecnológicos ya obtenidos o esperados. Veamos algunas citas significativas:

Del capítulo 2, párrafo 72: En las decisiones que se refieren a los flujos económicos, las plataformas digitales, la gestión de los datos y los algoritmos, no se puede dejar que pocos actores por sí solos orienten los procesos, sino que es necesario construir formas de cooperación que respeten los diversos niveles de la comunidad mundial y los hagan corresponsables del bien común.

En el párrafo 76: Hoy esta responsabilidad se extiende también a las infraestructuras digitales e informativas; como el ambiente natural, también el "ecosistema digital" puede ser cuidado o explotado, compartido o monopolizado. La solidaridad requiere que las decisiones en materia de datos, algoritmos, plataformas e IA tengan en cuenta no sólo el beneficio inmediato de algunos, sino el impacto en todos los pueblos y en las generaciones futuras.

En el párrafo 85: Las innovaciones tecnológicas -incluida la inteligencia artificial- no son neutrales; pueden aumentar la participación y la justicia, o ampliar las desigualdades, el control y la exclusión. Como toda herramienta, que puede utilizarse bien o mal.

Del capítulo 3, párrafo 128: [U]na tecnología que clasifica y optimiza lo que ya existe puede ser, sin querer, un obstáculo al cambio y al crecimiento. Para un algoritmo, el error es algo que hay que corregir; para una persona, puede ser el inicio de un cambio profundo. El futuro de una persona no es calculable, sino que está confiado a su libertad -elevada por la inagotable gracia divina- y a las relaciones que cultiva.

El capítulo 4 analiza las consecuencias negativas que puede tener la IA: contra la verdad; la dignidad del tranajo; sobre la libertad, a través de la dependencia y la mercantilización del hombre.

El capítulo 5 es un alegato contra la guerra, y un análisis de la civilización del amor que deberíamos construir para alcanzar la paz mundial lo antes posible.

En el párrafo 238 (Conclusión): Educar a las nuevas generaciones para que logren creer que la evolución de las tecnologías no sigue un camino inevitable, sino que puede estar orientada por la responsabilidad personal y colectiva, constituye uno de los servicios más valiosos al bien común.

Aquí va un enlace a un artículo de mi blog sobre lo que dice la encíclica sobre la inteligencia artificial: https://divulciencia.blogspot.com/202...

ENGLISH: This important encyclical raises many issues, some essential now, or which will soon be essential for our daily lives, due to technological advances already achieved or anticipated. Let's look at a few significant quotes:

From Chapter 2, paragraph 72: When it comes to decisions regarding economic flows and digital platforms, as well as the governance of data and algorithms, we cannot allow a handful of actors to dictate these processes on their own; instead, we must build forms of cooperation that respect the various levels of the global community and make them jointly responsible for the common good.

In paragraph 76: Today, this responsibility also extends to digital and information infrastructure. Like the natural environment, the "digital ecosystem" can be preserved or exploited, shared or monopolized. Solidarity demands that decisions regarding data, algorithms, platforms and artificial intelligence take into account not only the immediate benefit for a few, but also the impact on all peoples and on future generations.

In paragraph 85: Technological innovations, including artificial intelligence, are not neutral, for they can either foster participation and justice or exacerbate inequality, control and exclusion. As every tool, which can be used for good or for evil purposes.

From Chapter 3, paragraph 128: [A] technology that merely classifies and optimizes what already exists can, however unintentionally, become an obstacle to change and growth. For an algorithm, an error is a flaw to be corrected; for a person, however, an error can be a catalyst for profound change. A person’s future is not calculable, but depends on one’s freedom - elevated by the inexhaustible grace of God - and on the relationships cultivated.

Chapter 4 analyzes possible negative consequences of AI: against truth; against the dignity of work; and against freedom, through dependency and the commercialization of humankind.

Chapter 5 is a plea against war and an analysis of the civilization of love that we should build to achieve world peace as soon as possible.

From paragraph 238 (Conclusion): Teaching new generations that technological evolution does not follow a predetermined path, but can be guided by personal and collective responsibility, constitutes one of the most valuable services to the common good.

This is a link to a post in my blog about what the encyclical says about artificial intelligence: https://populscience.blogspot.com/202...

[Meredith Meyer · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is so rich and beautiful. I think it’s such a landmark CST document in the way that it summarizes the entire tradition up to now, incorporates theological developments (the dignity of women, care for creation, the universal call to holiness), and applies it all to the modern “res novae” which need our attention and consideration. Now that’s what I call scrutinizing the signs of the times and interpreting them in the light of the gospel!!!
As I said from the beginning, there’s nothing new about Papa Leo’s emphases here, but his prayerful and tactful way of stating them, in combination with the unique times for which they are written, makes his words still so powerful.
I think his main call here is for us to remember who we are, that our true magnificence is found in “the grandeur of humanity, in which God has made his dwelling,” and that the Kingdom of God is an already-but-not-yet reality for which we are called to strive through concrete action in our specific vocations <3

[Renato Garín · Rating 2 out of 5]

Los bienpensantes han descubierto una nueva obligación de época: aplaudir la encíclica Magnifica Humanitas de León XIV. En los últimos días, filósofos materialistas, progresistas satisfechos y liberales de ocasión han corrido a celebrar un texto que, leído sin reverencias, dice menos sobre la inteligencia artificial que sobre los temores de Roma.

La encíclica se presenta como una advertencia ética frente a la nueva tecnología. Su inquietud real, sin embargo, es ontológica. León XIV no discute únicamente qué haremos con la inteligencia artificial; discute quién conservará la autoridad para definir qué significa ser humano cuando la Iglesia ya no posee el monopolio de esa respuesta.

No es casual que el texto respire una influencia agustiniana desde sus primeras páginas. La oposición entre Babel y Jerusalén, entre soberbia humana y orden divino, sostiene toda la arquitectura del argumento. La inteligencia artificial aparece allí como el nombre moderno de una vieja sospecha: la pretensión de crear sin permiso, conocer sin intermediarios y transformar el mundo sin arrodillarse ante una autoridad trascendente.

Por eso el verdadero objeto de temor no son los algoritmos. Es la revolución cultural que viene detrás. La Iglesia se adaptó con relativa comodidad al mundo industrial: fábricas, sindicatos, partidos, Estados nacionales, familias estables, calendarios comunes. Ese universo todavía ofrecía cuerpos reunidos y obediencias reconocibles. El mundo digital, en cambio, disuelve esos soportes. La pantalla compite con el púlpito. La plataforma captura la atención que antes administraban las instituciones. La autoridad se dispersa.

León XIV entiende ese fenómeno mejor que muchos de sus entusiastas laicos. La pérdida de influencia católica en Occidente no es un accidente ni una simple estadística religiosa. Forma parte de una mutación más profunda en la manera en que las personas construyen identidad, comunidad y sentido. *Magnifica Humanitas* intenta intervenir en esa disputa antes de que el desplazamiento sea irreversible.

Lo llamativo es que tantos intelectuales seculares acepten sin resistencia el marco conceptual de Roma. Como si toda crítica a Silicon Valley debiera terminar bajo tutela eclesiástica. Como si denunciar a los nuevos magnates tecnológicos obligara a conceder al Vaticano la última palabra sobre el destino humano.

Nada de esto vuelve inútiles las advertencias sobre concentración económica, vigilancia, manipulación o precarización. Varias son pertinentes. El problema es otro: detrás de esa crítica existe una batalla mayor. No se discute solamente quién controlará la inteligencia artificial. Se discute quién tendrá autoridad para nombrar al ser humano en el siglo XXI.

Esa pregunta merece un debate serio, no un coro de repetidores. La época en que Roma hablaba y el mundo asentía quedó atrás hace mucho. Y conviene recordarlo: no fueron las encíclicas las que abrieron esa puerta, sino la ciencia, la crítica, el comercio, la técnica y la magnífica inventiva humana.

[Jorge Zuluaga · Rating 4 out of 5]

No leía una encíclica posiblemente desde 1990 —se me cayó la cédula— y ahora, después de leer Magnifica Humanitas, ya me entraron ganas de leer por lo menos otras dos. Y es que con este texto descubrí que la Iglesia católica, o por lo menos sus pensadores más progresistas, incluyendo por supuesto a Francis Prevost, el papa León XIV, entienden —o han entendido, tal vez yo no me enteraba— que si se presta una atención prioritaria al bienestar de todas las personas, especialmente las menos privilegiadas, y menos a los avances tecnológicos —en especial los de la inteligencia artificial que dominan este momento histórico y a la acumulación de poder y capital asociados con ellos—, nuestro planeta será más habitable. ¿Será que me vuelvo católico otra vez?

Claro que Prevost, desde su influyente posición, no es el primero en llamar la atención sobre esta verdad de perogrullo. Y perdonen que llame de esa manera al tema central de esta encíclica; habla por mí —y creo que es un sentimiento compartido por muchas más personas— esta sensación de impotencia que produce el hecho de que haya personas que todavía se resistan a entender que ninguna excusa es buena para destruir el tejido social y ecológico. Ninguna.

Ya en el pasado, Jorge Bergoglio, el papa Francisco, había escrito dos extraordinarias encíclicas sobre el mismo tema, Laudato Si’ y Fratelli Tutti, que son precisamente las otras dos encíclicas que he puesto en mi lista de libros por leer. Si me animo, tal vez le meta el diente también a Rerum Novarum, la encíclica del antecesor de Prevost, el papa León XIII o Gioacchino Pecci —para seguir la convención de usar sus nombres seculares, que me parece mejor cuando se analiza su producción intelectual y no doctrinal—, que es precisamente la inspiración de Magnifica Humanitas, como lo reconoce Prevost en distintos apartes del escrito.

Antes de comenzar con el tema central de la encíclica, unas palabras sobre la estructura y los apartes que pueden ahorrarse si, como yo, no son católicos fervorosos. Traté de leer todo el texto evitando saltarme los apartes más confesionales. Igual, por mi formación como católico, puedo reconocer, e incluso tolerar, la mayoría de los aspectos mágico-religiosos de esta doctrina.

Casi la totalidad de la encíclica tiene contenidos valiosos. Para entender algunas referencias de la parte más interesante del texto —es decir, aquella que tiene que ver con la inteligencia artificial— es mejor leer la introducción y el capítulo primero, que son los que más elementos confesionales contienen.

El núcleo del problema se desarrolla entre los capítulos 3 y 5, que son el plato fuerte de la encíclica y un análisis brillante sobre los posibles efectos nocivos que tendría seguir por el camino por el que va el desarrollo de los sistemas de inteligencia artificial y la industria —por no decir la máquina de imprimir billetes y evaporar agua— en la que se ha convertido.

El capítulo 2 está dedicado a presentar los aspectos doctrinales de la Iglesia en los que se enmarca la discusión. Si bien este aparte del libro tiene un interés mayor para creyentes y líderes católicos, para mí fue muy interesante conocer la Doctrina Social de la Iglesia y su historia.

¿Cuándo me iba yo a imaginar que la Iglesia católica fuera tan "comunista"? Je, je. La institución que fuera heredera del monstruoso Imperio romano, ella misma un modelo de corrupción y apoyo a los peores poderes seculares de la historia, ¿cuándo iba a creer que terminaría convertida, especialmente en los últimos 100 años, en un sistema de pensamiento que defiende unos valores sociales realmente de avanzada; para decirlo en pocas palabras, valores cristianos? Ni en mis sueños más salvajes.

Pues me alegra mucho, la verdad. Debo confesar que me reconcilié un poco con la Iglesia, aunque los deseos de perdonar se me quitaron tan pronto como Prevost —o el ejército de escritores que lo acompañan en los antes más confesionales— ataca el aborto. Bueno, no todo podría ser un olor de rosas.

Paradójicamente, el aparte más confesional y el que diría que pueden saltarse casi en su totalidad es la Conclusión. Un capítulo en el que esperábamos una buena síntesis de los mensajes de los capítulos centrales se convierte en un manual de doctrina, para mí, más bien ilegible. Con secciones con títulos como "El Verbo se hizo carne" y "Un solo cuerpo en Cristo", ya se sabe por dónde va el agua al molino. Si, como me pasó a mí, no vinieron por la religión, evítense la molestia de la mayor parte de ese capítulo y más bien péguenle una releída a cualquiera de los capítulos 3, 4 o 5.

El corazón de la reflexión de Prevost puede resumirse con este párrafo: Hoy, los principales motores del desarrollo son actores privados, a menudo transnacionales, dotados de recursos y capacidad de acción superiores a los de muchos gobiernos. El poder tecnológico adquiere así un rostro inédito, predominantemente "privado", y por ello aún más difícil de discernir, gobernar y orientar hacia el bien común.

Me gustó mucho el concepto de que la Iglesia no debe meterse en los asuntos "temporales" de la sociedad, la política o los modelos económicos. Aunque suene bastante contradictorio con lo que realmente pasa en el mundo, en el que ministros de esta misma religión ejercen de influenciadores de la ultraderecha siglo-veintiunera, saber que los lineamientos de la máxima jerarquía de esta poderosa organización religiosa reconocen una separación entre estos dominios de la sociedad me produce un fresquito.

También me encargaré de recordar la siguiente frase a algunos de los "camanduleros" de ultraderecha con los que me topo con frecuencia en mi entorno y que quisieran ver a mi país, Colombia, reducido a una guerra eterna para conseguir un "supuesto" orden que solo existe en sus cabezas: La Iglesia considera compañeros de camino a todos aquellos que buscan sinceramente "la verdad, la bondad y la belleza", considerándolos "preciosos aliados" en la defensa de la dignidad de cada persona y en la custodia de la creación. Asumiendo el estilo pastoral del Concilio.

Naturalmente, lo que más me impresionó fue descubrir el buen nivel técnico de algunas de las exposiciones que hace Prevost en los apartes centrales, manteniendo siempre un lenguaje sencillo y asequible para un conjunto muy amplio de potenciales lectores. El texto va desde la definición misma de lo que es "inteligencia" en este contexto —marcando la diferencia entre los algoritmos de IA y la mente humana, así como las confusiones que se pueden producir en la gente por la forma en que estos sistemas imitan nuestras expresiones careciendo de una experiencia orgánica del mundo, de emociones, sentimientos o de una conciencia moral—, pasando por las consideraciones ambientales y el impacto que estos sistemas pueden producir en el equilibrio de la biosfera, hasta llegar a los aspectos económicos, políticos y éticos del crecimiento descontrolado de la IA.

Me quedo con un montón de excelentes citas y párrafos de esta encíclica, que encierran algunos de los temas de los que otro autor llamaría "la conversación más importante de nuestro tiempo". Espero de verdad que este documento genere un impacto real: primero, en las personas que están al frente de las compañías que pueden considerar importante la palabra del máximo líder de la Iglesia católica (es improbable, la mayoría de ellos no deben ser católicos practicantes); pero segundo, y más importante, en los miles de millones de católicos de los países democráticos, que pueden impactar con su voto el desarrollo desregulado de estas tecnologías, especialmente aquellas que sabemos pueden afectar más a la sociedad y a la naturaleza.

Pero Magnifica Humanitas no se reduce solamente a tratar los problemas derivados del desarrollo desregulado de la inteligencia artificial. Una buena parte de la encíclica presenta también reflexiones profundas sobre la educación, la política, el nacionalismo y la paz (especialmente la paz).

Cierro con esta frase que creo recoge bien el mensaje de la encíclica: "La evolución de las tecnologías no sigue un camino inevitable, sino que puede estar orientada por la responsabilidad personal y colectiva".

Larga vida a Prevost y a todos los influenciadores religiosos que sostienen convicciones como las que leemos en esta encíclica.

¡A por las encíclicas de Bergoglio!

2026/07/02

[Jae · Rating 5 out of 5]

Highly recommend this read for Christians or really anyone interested in pursuing a common good…

A quote!

“It is not enough to invoke efficiency, nor to celebrate the benefits of innovation, if they are built on a chain of exploitation that remains deliberately hidden. If technology promises emancipation, yet produces new forms of global subordination, it stands in contradiction to the fundamental principle of human dignity.”

[Samuel Nguyen · Rating 5 out of 5]

I feel kinda obliged to rate this 5/5 since the boss in the Vatican might see this review.

[Michele · Rating 2 out of 5]

Perbenismo parrocchiale unito a carsiche reminiscenze reazionarie.

[Fr. Zachary Brasseur · Rating 4 out of 5]

“Even when machines excel in efficiency, a human face that asks to be gazed upon remains the center of our history.”

In short, the way we engage with or don’t engage with artificial intelligence (or any new technology) seriously impacts how we live and act as Christians and as humans.

4 stars because these encyclicals have become too damn long.

[Zuzana Kollarova · Rating 5 out of 5]

read like a manifest ❤️‍🔥🔝

[Emily Strom · Rating 5 out of 5]

Reading this makes me love Pope Leo more than I already did. He really identified a serious, less-talked about problem in our culture when he talked about how we are forgetting what it means to be truly human. Wanting to reduce discomfort and suffering is an understandable and somewhat laudable motive for action, but it is not the ultimate good. We still need to live fully human lives, and suffering is part of being human. As much as I don't want to experience suffering, I know it has helped me grow so much closer to God, and I am grateful for that.

I was hoping Pope Leo would spell out exactly when AI use is permissible and not permissible because that is something I think about all the time. Obviously turning in an AI-generated paper is wrong, but what about using it to brainstorm ideas? What about using it to refine a rubric for teaching? Instead, Pope Leo reminded all of us to not use AI in a way that makes us less human or interferes with the dignity of others, but I do think that's something we all need to hear. Is use of AI eroding my ability to problem-solve or create or analyze? If so, it's not good because those are essential human skills.

And the application of Catholic Social Teaching is also so important in a culture that tends to focus on left- and right-wing politics. Businesses need to have ethical practices, and the government should have some way of holding them accountable for the sake of the common good. But the government also needs to avoid from getting overly involved because of the principle of subsidiarity.

I'm sure so much more could be said, but I'm going to end here for now. Just go read something by Pope Leo...God is speaking a lot of wisdom through him.

"Among these ideologies, I consider particularly insidious the one that suggests that every person must earn or justify his or her own worth, to the point of attributing greater value to those who are more efficient or effective."

"Everythung that appears as a 'limit' -- incapacity, illness, old age, suffering, vulnerability -- tends to be seen primarily as a defect to be corrected, rather than as a reality through which our humanity matures and opens itself to relationship. "

"[I]t is imperative to cultivate hearts that love truth, prefer what is right despite the most appealing content and pursue wisdom rather than immediate results."

[Adrian Colletti]

I finished the Encyclical last week and it is still sitting with me. Pope Leo XIV did an excellent job examining AI in a holistic view, directing the reader towards the beauty of humanity as a way to approach AI, bringing up humankind, and through that reexamining AI and its uses. Weird reading a paper from the Vatican that has content that could be found in an Isaac Asimov book, yet integrating itself with the Christian faith so well (albiet maybe a little too Catholic for me in different parts). I took some highlights, some banger quotes, from the paper that stuck out to me, adding some of my thoughts too, starting with how he started his introduction.

The comparison Pope Leo XIV makes at the beginning between the Tower of Babel and Nehemiah’s rebuilding of the walls was such a lovely choice, showing that the way to build something is not by people being a homogenous collective, building through pride and through the opposition of God, as Babel did. Instead it is done by people in their uniqueness, their diversity, contributing how they can, with what they can, from their individual gifts like how Nehemiah brought the community together for the rebuilding of Jerusalem: “The narrative shows how the city is reborn, not through the initiative of one man, but through the shared responsibility of all: men, women, priests, artisans, heads of households and young people all play a part. It is an undertaking with God at the center, which rebuilds relationships before rebuilding with stones.” Artificial Intelligence takes away the uniqueness that each individual can offer, asserting itself, in many ways, above humanity, with people even seeing it as god, or at least something more valuable than what one’s fellow human can offer to them.

I loved the way Pope Leo XIV talked about the beauty of humanity being limited:
“Finitude, when truly accepted, does not diminish us but opens us to recognizing the face of God and others. Indeed, precisely because we experience limits — vulnerability, suffering and failure — we can recognize the inviolable dignity of every person, both our own and that of others” It is so romantic the way he is able to talk about the limits of humanity as something wonderful, something AI cannot wrestle with. Even what we cannot do is something to appreciate as it pushes us to live in community with each other, pushes us out of our loneliness and solitude. These limits are important to accept and appreciate since “If the human being is treated as something to be perfected or surpassed, it becomes easier to accept that some lives are less useful, less desirable or less worthy.” This imperfectness being perfect reminds me of what Paul says in 2nd Corinthians, “But [God] said to me, ‘My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.’ Therefore I will boast all the more gladly about my weaknesses, so that Christ’s power may rest on me. That is why, for Christ’s sake, I delight in weaknesses, in insults, in hardships, in persecutions, in difficulties. For when I am weak, then I am strong.” I love the fact that we are perfectly imperfect. I love the fact we all are not as “smart” as AI. I love the fact we can grow and be changed by our interactions with each other.

He even goes Dostoevskian with the way he brings up meaning through limitations and suffering: “Even when limitations are experienced as inner suffering, human wisdom teaches us not to deny or suppress it, but to integrate it. To eliminate suffering entirely would mean, in the end, extinguishing love and desire as well. Those who love and desire cannot avoid passing through trial and suffering; and over the years, we carry within us lessons that leave their mark like scars, the memories of a journey shaped by freedom and failure, dreams and disappointments. It is only thanks to the interplay of these elements that the wonders of the soul occur within us, allowing us to sense the richness of our humanity. To renounce this adventure, both tragic and splendid, in the name of a presumed transcendence of all limits, could mean many things, but it would no longer be human.” Suffering is a nasty topic to wrestle with, but whether we agree on its purpose, it is something every human goes through in some forms, some more than others. It is not something that AI can ever experience, never knowing what it means to suffer stops it from truly knowing what it means to be a human being. Although I may not enjoy suffering, I relish in the fact that it separates me from AI.

Pope Leo XIV even celebrates the joys of just passing time with each other, not achieving anything but enjoying each other as people sharing sweet nothings with one another: “Indeed, dialogue is an ordinary part of human life and does not only concern relations between States. It involves acquiring an attitude that seeks to forge bonds of fraternity built on listening, an open demeanor, making time for each other and even wasting time together. For if we experience authentic encounters with others, with those who are different, strangers and migrants, it becomes much more difficult even to imagine war.”

Near the end he ties it back well to religion, something quite unique to Christianity is the incarnation, the fact that we serve a God who took on human form with its limits, a person who is fully God and fully human, a limitless God who found glory in the limits of humanity: “No computational system, however sophisticated, can create a heart that gives itself, or a conscience that discerns good from evil. Even when machines excel in efficiency, a human face that asks to be gazed upon remains the center of our history. This human face is the fullness toward which history is moving.” Humanity was created in God’s image and God took that form Himself as Jesus, a form AI can only try to emulate, never truly being able to relate to us as He does, and Pope Leo XIV reminds us that through this upholding of Jesus as human also harkens the fact that we have 8.3 billion people who share that image that we need to uphold too.

The idea that what we “do for the least of these brothers and sisters”, is something we do for Him: “The quality of a civilization is measured not by the power of its means, but by the care it is able to offer, by its ability to recognize the other as a face not merely as a function. The ability to care for one another is a fundamental dimension of our humanity, one that is learned and mastered through lived experience. Reading stories to a child, offering company to an elderly person and arranging a home so that it is welcoming are simple gestures often rooted in family life. They teach us to value care at a societal level and train us to recognize others as persons worthy of attention.” Taking part in the little things in life with everyone around us is something that we can do to show the splendor of humanity, as a way to protest AI, something AI can never achieve is the beautiful presence we share with each other.

Many more banger quotes in the encyclical for you to discover! Great paper, glad I read it. Had the joys of reading the first 1/3 with a group of people, the community made it better to actively discuss and ask questions, hearing each others unique thoughts at the same time, would recommend.

[Mike · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is awesome. Some, myself included, may even call it…magnificent.

[Ricardo Vela · Rating 5 out of 5]

Interesantísima la primera Encíclica de León XIV. Para releer y aplicar en muchas de sus partes. Lo más relevante es lo mucho que se está hablando...y el debate y la reflexión que aporta a la conversación pública.

[Nakedfartbarfer · Rating 4 out of 5]

I read Pope Leo's encyclical to see if the hubbub around it is justified or in any way accurate. I don't think it's exactly an ecclesiastical censure of artificial intelligence, but it is a whole bunch of warnings about the ways that generative AI may damage human dignity under our current psychotic economic structures.

"Even when machines excel in efficiency, a human face that asks to be gazed upon remains the center of our history."

I'm new to papal reaction content, so it's interesting to see all of the references in here to previous encyclicals (particularly Rerum Novarum, written by a previous Pope Leo), as well as to scripture, liturgical treatises and even to Tolkien, amounting to the same compassionate, ecumenical pronouncements about workers contending with LLMs and ruthless profit extraction that you might find in a Haymarket text.

There were a bunch of other topics I didn't expect to find covered here in a lil sacerdotal 'zine but which Leo burnishes as well as any academic: transhumanism, subsidiarity, myths of human optimization, and technocratic paradigms. The general Vatican verdict on AI seems to be the same verdict reached by any literate person who isn't looking to extract a giant, taxpayer-subsidized profit from it. As Nic Cage said, we should not let robots do our dreaming for us.

A large chunk of the 82-page encyclical itself is spent re-affirming what I'm learning (as a lifelong lapsed Catholic) are professedly permanent fixtures of the Catholic social doctrine: the common good, social justice, human dignity, and the universal destination of goods (i.e. the commons, in which Leo XIV includes digital resources as constituent parts).

However, the one thing I think any layperson might wanna know and which the Catholic Church ought to spend the rest of its mission on Earth addressing: Pope Leo makes reference to a previous encyclical from Pope Francis wherein Francis thanks journalists: "I also thank you for what you tell us about what goes wrong in the Church, for helping us not to sweep it under the carpet, and for the voice you have given to the victims of abuse."

The most I've ever dared hoped for (as a means of deterring predators from the cloth) is that the Catholic Church has lost quite a bit of institutional muscle and might not be the shortcut to power and plausible respectability for sex pests that it used to be. That's a pretty low bar of accountability, but my expectations for this cabal of purported volcels who sit around while religious sisters cook for them has been pretty low. It does seem like our unchaste pedophiles have been more drawn to public than to clerical office of late, though maybe I have a recency bias.

Where the question of abortion came up, Leo made none of the doctrinal allowances and equivocation of yore about "unformed" vs "animated" fetuses and there's yet little theological distinction between contraception and abortifacients, so we probably needn't cape too hard for a cool Chicagoland Pope. Leo and Francis may at least allow non-liturgical blessings for same-sex couples, but I also always figured the supreme pontiff has a red phone on his desk what rings any time two furtive monsignors hike up their priestly vestments together to commit a victimless sin within the Leonine Walls.

Leo does aver that the Church has always strongly supported labor unions and the right to associate (I presume sometime after the Church stopped rationalizing non-chattel forms of slavery): "....and reiterates the requirement that wages be proportionate not only to performance, but also to the needs of workers and their families." There are a lotta good, high-minded passages on the rights of workers, though Leo doesn't go so far as to say that none of these things have ever, or will ever, be realized under capitalism.

I have more affection for cause than for crusader, but I'm all for solidarity across leanings, and was mostly happy with what I found in here. I'm also increasingly of the opinion that if I don't semi-regularly read and refresh on some political theory or philosophical thesis affirming that there is hardly such a thing as moral neutrality, then I have no working framework to be anything other than reactionary. I've at least done my diligence this month.

[Nieves F]

León XIV firma su primera encíclica con una pregunta que llevo tiempo haciéndome desde otro ángulo, el jurídico: ¿para quién es la tecnología? Y verla formulada así, desde la fe, desde la tradición que va de Rerum Novarum hasta hoy, me ha producido esa extraña satisfacción de reconocer que el pensamiento cristiano sigue siendo capaz de llegar al hueso de las cosas cuando se lo propone.

La imagen de Babel no es nueva, claro. Pero aquí no es adorno retórico: es el diagnóstico exacto de lo que ocurre cuando el progreso se construye sin preguntarse el fin. Y Nehemías como contrapropuesta —cada familia su tramo de muralla, nadie solo, nadie prescindible— tiene una belleza que va más allá de la alegoría. Es una eclesiología, casi sin quererlo.

Lo que sostiene todo el texto, en realidad, es antropología. No solo ética tecnológica ni doctrina social en sentido estrecho: es una defensa de lo que el ser humano es, frente a todo lo que hoy promete redefinirlo. El transhumanismo, la reducción a dato, la eficiencia como criterio último — León los confronta desde la Encarnación, que es la apuesta más radical de la historia: que lo humano, con sus límites y su fragilidad, vale tanto que Dios quiso habitarlo. Desde ahí, los límites no son errores a corregir sino parte constitutiva de la dignidad. Eso no lo dice cualquier documento de regulación tecnológica.

El capítulo sobre el trabajo me ha parecido el más verdadero. Hay en él una comprensión del miedo concreto —el del trabajador que ve su oficio disolverse— que no es paternalismo sino compasión con nombres propios. Y la defensa de la dignidad laboral no suena a nostalgia: suena a mandato.

Mi única reserva es el capítulo final, sobre paz y multilateralismo. Es necesario, sí, y valiente en lo que dice sobre las armas y la IA militar. Pero en algún momento cae en un voluntarismo que el resto del texto había evitado: *relanzar el diálogo* necesita más carne en el hueso cuando el mundo está como está.

Aun así: qué alegría que el nuevo papa escriba así. Con hondura, sin miedo al presente, con esa confianza serena en que la fe tiene algo que decir —y que vale la pena escuchar— incluso aquí.

[Hendrik Mosterd · Rating 5 out of 5]

Wat een ontzettend goed document is dit. Hier wordt ik heel blij van. Hedendaagse vragen worden in het licht van het evangelie besproken. Behulpzaam om het tijdsgewricht te verstaan waar we in leven. Kritisch maar hoopvol. Geworteld in een rijke traditie en open naar de wereld.

[Mario · Rating 4 out of 5]

A parte qualche parte un po' ridondante, si legge bene. Il contenuto è interessante e può aiutare una presa di coscienza sul nostro rapporto alla tecnologia, in particolare l'IA.