Why should anyone listen to what Pope Leo says about AI?

It was a question that was bound to be asked after Pope Leo XIV wrote about artificial intelligence in “Magnifica Humanitas.” Even though Pope Leo’s first encyclical is more about human dignity, much of the document comments on and critiques A.I. Almost immediately, critics asked what the Holy Father and the Vatican could possibly know about such a complex topic.

One executive in Silicon Valley said to The New York Times the Vatican “couldn’t have a position on [A.I.], because they don’t understand it.” In an interview on Fox Business, Interior Secretary Doug Burgum said, “I didn’t know that tech editorializing was part of the role of being pope.” This is the main critique: Pope Leo should stay in his lane. On the other side are those who felt the encyclical did not go far enough—again, because the pope does not understand A.I., in this case, the threats it poses. Overly “sanguine,” said one commentator about the Holy Father, critiquing his encyclical as “disappointingly measured and cautious.”

So why should we listen to the pope?

First of all, though this has flown under many people’s radars, the Vatican has studied this topic in depth for years. The Minerva Dialogues have invited A.I. experts alongside moral theologians and other scholars for conversations about the morality of artificial intelligence. Moreover, many Catholic scholars have been engaged in deep study of these topics, like Paolo Benanti, T.O.R., a moral theologian and university professor who has advised Google on A.I. and chairs the Italian government’s A.I. working group. Likewise, Bishop Paul Tighe, also a moral theologian and the secretary of culture for the Vatican’s Dicastery for Culture and Education, has studied, written about and spoken on artificial intelligence extensively. The Vatican knows far more about this topic than most people suspect.

Second, the Vatican has no vested interests in the A.I. industry and so is able to address these topics with greater freedom. The Vatican does not manufacture, develop or trade stocks in A.I.: It makes no money from it. And, obviously, Pope Leo has no interest in turning a profit from A.I., satisfying shareholders or breaking into new markets. This contrasts with the perspectives of a “tech bro” or anyone in the industry. Much of the other commentary on these issues, while well-meaning and sincere, is inevitably tied to either personal or corporate interests. The Vatican is freer from what St. Ignatius Loyola would call “attachments” and so speaks with greater freedom. 

Third, when it comes to discerning the best course of action for the common good, that is, the larger goals of humanity (instead of the narrower goals of the A.I. industry, technical progress or even the economy), the church already has a series of philosophical and theological principles on hand. One of the main strengths of “Magnifica Humanitas” is its clear and methodical summary of the tenets of Catholic social teaching, which lay out guidelines for decision-making in the interest of the common good, with special attention to the poor, who are often excluded from consideration. As many digital executives have discovered in the last few years, there is no need to invent a new moral framework; the church already has one. 

Fourth, for those who think that Leo should stay in his wheelhouse, it is important to note that popes have commented on global social concerns since at least the time of Pope Leo XIII, the author of “Rerum Novarum.” That earlier encyclical, published in 1891, marked the beginning of modern Catholic social teaching and commented on the rights of laborers and labor unions in the wake of the Industrial Revolution. Every few decades since then, popes have written encyclicals that both reflect on and, in a sense, update “Rerum Novarum.” Pope Leo XIV is now commenting on concerns raised by the digital revolution. This is part of the church’s role in the modern world. 

Fifth, as the disciples said to Jesus, “Lord, to whom should we go?” (Jn 6:68). Who else on the world stage has studied the moral questions surrounding A.I., is independent of moneyed interests and is offering a document that views the topic from a spiritual point of view—gratis? The parallel here is with Pope Francis’ encyclical “Laudato Si’,” which took what was previously seen primarily as a political and scientific issue—climate change—and reframed it as a spiritual one. “Magnifica Humanitas” takes A.I., previously seen as a political and technical issue, and reminds us that it is also a spiritual one. 

Finally, even if you disagree with all the above reasons, the encyclical itself is superb: subtle, methodical, profound. Res ipsa loquitur, the thing speaks for itself. It offers not only an astute diagnosis of the blessings and curses of artificial intelligence but also reminds us that decisions regarding artificial intelligence should be centered around how they affect the dignity of the human person.

All good reasons to listen to Pope Leo when it comes to A.I. The Holy Father and the Vatican know what they are talking about, have no moneyed interests to sway them, draw from a tried-and-true moral framework, have been speaking about social issues for centuries and are one of the few places offering this kind of deep commentary. And again, the document speaks for itself. To quote Mary at the wedding feast at Cana: “Listen to him.”