Teachings on AI from
Pope Leo XIV
Highlights from his encyclical Magnifica Humanitas
Pope Leo has released his first encyclical, on safeguarding the human person in the time of artificial intelligence. We recommend reading the whole document, but below are main takeaways, in the form of quotes with their corresponding paragraph numbers (emphasis added). At the bottom, you can check out our warning signs and more questions to ask before using generative AI. We have organized the quotes according to the two main examples he gives in this first quote:
CNS photo/Lola Gomez
7a. In order to answer these questions and discern how to navigate responsibly the era of AI, I would like to bring to mind two scenes from the Bible:
the construction of the Tower of Babel (cf. Gen 11:1-9) and the rebuilding of the walls of Jerusalem (cf. Neh 2–6).
Babel
7b. The story of Babel...
… appears in the Book of Genesis, at the origins of humanity… the people decided to build a city and a tower ‘with its top in the heavens’ (Gen 11:4). Fearing being scattered across the earth, they sought to guarantee stability and power for themselves, and above all to ‘make a name’ for themselves…. However, the project concealed a profound danger. It was a project conceived without reference to God, supported by a uniformity that eliminated diversity and that chose homogenization over communion. When a city is built on pride and the claim to self-sufficiency, communication breaks down, languages are confused and people no longer understand each other…. 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.
10a. We must, then, avoid the 'Babel syndrome,'...
… namely the idolatry of profit that sacrifices the weak, a uniformity that neutralizes differences, and the pretense that a single language — even a digital one — can translate everything, including the mystery of the person, into data and performance.
51b. 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. From this perspective, persons end up being reduced to a means of achieving results, a resource to be used and exploited, and are no longer recognized as a proper end in themselves who should never be instrumentalized. The value of persons, however, does not depend on what they achieve or produce. There are rights that apply to everyone simply by virtue of being human, and no human power can legitimately deny or arbitrarily limit them.
71a. The principle of subsidiarity...
… applies especially in the context of the digital revolution. Here, the highest level is not the State, but rather major economic and technological actors that exercise de facto power over the conditions of everyday life. This level, which monopolizes expertise, data and decision-making authority, involves companies and platforms that define conditions for access, rules of visibility, forms of interaction, and even economic opportunities.
99a. [W]e must avoid the misconception of equating this type of 'intelligence' with that of human beings....
… These systems merely imitate certain functions of human intelligence. In doing so, they often surpass human intelligence in speed and computational capacity, offering tangible benefits across many fields. Yet this power remains entirely tied to data processing. So-called artificial intelligences 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. Nor do they have a moral conscience, since they do not judge good and evil, grasp the ultimate meaning of situations, or bear responsibility for consequences.Â
99b. They do no understand
They may imitate language, behavior and analytical skills, or even simulate empathy and understanding, but they do not understand what they produce, for they lack the affective, relational and spiritual perspective through which human beings grow in wisdom…. Rather, it is a form of statistical adaptation based on data and feedback, which can be very effective, but does not imply inner growth.
100a. In personal use, three aspects deserve careful consideration:...
… the ease with which results are obtained, the impression of objectivity and the simulation of human communication.
100b. The speed and simplicity...
… with which information, complex analyses, media content and practical assistance can be accessed undoubtedly makes life easier. Yet they can also encourage excessive reliance and the search for ready-made answers, and weaken personal creativity and judgment.
100c. The apparent objectivity...
… of the responses and suggestions these systems provide can lead us to overlook the fact that they reflect the cultural assumptions of those who designed and trained them, with all their strengths and limitations.
100d. The artificial imitation of positive human communication...
… words of advice, empathy, friendship and even love — can be engaging…. However, for less discerning users, it can also be misleading, creating the illusion of a relationship with a real personal subject. When words are simulated, they do not build genuine relationships, but only their appearance. The artificial imitation of care or support can become particularly risky when it enters contexts where real relationships and emotional bonds are lacking. Here, the danger is not so much that a person may believe they are communicating with another person, but rather that they may gradually lose the very desire to form genuine human connections.
102. New forms of exclusion appearing to be neutral and objective
The use of AI is never a purely technical matter: when it enters processes that affect people’s lives, it touches on rights, opportunities, status and freedom…. There are clearly harmful uses, such as the manipulation of information or violations of privacy. Yet there is also a subtler danger, for when AI systems present themselves as neutral and objective, they end up reflecting and reinforcing the stereotypes or ideological bias of their designers and developers.
104. [W]e cannot consider AI to be morally neutral....
… In reality, every technical tool embodies choices and priorities through what it measures, ignores and optimizes, and how it classifies people and situations. [E]thical discernment cannot be limited to asking whether we are using a system for good or bad purposes; it must also examine how that system is designed and what vision of the human person and society is embedded in the data and models that guide it.
112. [W]e must now return to our central question: what does it mean to safeguard our humanity?...
… More gravely, the pervasive technocratic paradigm in which we are immersed, and that is amplified by the digital revolution and AI, threatens to normalize an anti-human vision. In that vision, the fullness of life is equated with having more, reducing weakness, eliminating uncertainty and exerting total control. 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.
113. [T]echnical power, if left unbalanced, does not make us more capable;...
… it makes us more isolated and more vulnerable to being dominated and excluded. This critical point does not oppose intelligence, but serves as a reminder that when intelligence becomes self-referential, its true purpose of serving life and the human person is lost.
129b. A new form of Babel
If, however, power grows while the heart withers and human bonds fray, then we are faced with a new form of Babel — a construction that is grandiose, yet fundamentally dehumanizing.
133a. Man's attempt to be the sole author of himself
Those who command powerful technological and economic resources, along with substantial human capital for intervention, possess significant capabilities for influencing cultural change. Ultimately, they can influence a significant number of people concerning the truth about humanity, the world, the meaning of existence, the family and even God. This is pure power detached from truth, which subtly or overtly imposes what it wishes others to accept as true. At its root lies a deeper and often unrecognized ‘sickness’: the fact that ‘modern man is wrongly convinced that he is the sole author of himself, his life and society. This is a presumption that follows from being selfishly closed in upon himself.’ Consequently, people believe that they can construct reality, and that whatever best suits their claims corresponds to what is true.
133b. Losing respect for the truth
Saint John Paul II reflected on the consequences of this ‘crisis of truth,’ going so far as to state that ‘once the idea of a universal truth about the good, knowable by human reason, is lost, inevitably the notion of conscience also changes.’ In such a context, universally valid truths, which precede us and which conscience must accept, are no longer recognized. This led Pope Francis to ask with realism: ‘What is law without the conviction, born of age-old reflection and great wisdom, that each human being is sacred and inviolable?’ To which he concluded: ‘If society is to have a future, it must respect the truth of our human dignity and submit to that truth. Murder is not wrong simply because it is socially unacceptable and punished by law, but because of a deeper conviction. This is a non-negotiable truth attained by the use of reason and accepted in conscience. A society is noble and decent, not least for its support of the pursuit of truth and its adherence to the most basic of truths.’
140. Education takes time
Education, by contrast, is a long journey requiring patience, and therefore needs time for development and for engagement with reality beyond appearances. This is a fundamental issue because every technology shapes those who use it. 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 risk extinguishing the desire to ask questions, which is a process that bears fruit only over time. As Plato wrote, the deepest and most important things are learned only after much time and effort, by engaging in discussion with others, ‘striking upon’ ideas and experiences together like flint until the spark of understanding is kindled within us. We must learn, then, how to exercise restraint in the use of AI and to protect our young people from the promise of the perfect machine, from that subtle temptation which renders human thought seemingly superfluous precisely when it is most needed.
170. Capturing your time and attention
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. When business models thrive on human weakness, the person is treated as a means rather than as an end; those who design or finance such systems bear a moral responsibility that cannot be ignored. There is an urgent need to promote technologies that strengthen interior freedom by fostering education in digital sobriety and the protection of minors, thus countering models that exploit vulnerability.
12 Warning Signs to Watch for Before Using Generative AI
- Is my goal to guarantee power for myself, like the builders of the Tower of Babel?
- Am I determining my value by how efficiently I perform this work, as if I were a product to be optimized? Would this usage of AI lead others to attribute greater value to me because I appeared to be more efficient?
- Could this lead me to believe that I can construct reality as the sole author of my life or tempt me to think that something is true only if it best suits my claims?
- Could it obscure others’ appreciation of human dignity if…
- … they were to view the finished product of my AI usage?
- … they were to use AI similarly?
- Is this software being imposed on me by an employer or powerful tech company? Are they preventing me from easily opting out?
- Is this platform trying to capture my time and attention?
- Would this software appear to be equivalent with human intelligence? Could it give the impression that it “understands” what it produces?
- Could this increase my reliance on ready-made answers, weaken my personal creativity and judgement, or lessen my desire to ask questions and think about them over time?
- Would it appear to provide an objective answer to my prompt?
- Could it simulate words so as to create the illusion of a relationship with a real personal subject?
- Could this weaken my desire to form genuine human connections or make me more isolated from family and friends, while making me believe I’m becoming more capable?
- Am I spending less time in the physical presence of other people?
If you answered “yes” to any of these, it’s probably not a good idea to use it.
Jerusalem
8. The walls of Jerusalem
After the Babylonian exile, a portion of the people [of Israel] returned to Jerusalem, but the city was still in ruins, the walls collapsed and the gates burned (cf. Neh 1–2). Nehemiah… received news of the disastrous state of his ancestral city. Before taking action, he fasted, prayed and interceded for the people…. He did not impose solutions from above. He convened the families, assigned each of them a section of the wall to rebuild, listened to their concerns, coordinated their efforts and addressed any opposition. 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. Thus, ancient Jerusalem rediscovers a common language — not one of uniformity, but one of communion, namely the harmony that arises when all persons assume their own role and recognize that their strength comes from the Lord.
10b. Instead, let us choose the 'way of Nehemiah,'...
… which highlights the importance of working together to make the City of God a safe place for returning exiles. Rebuilding today means recognizing that, precisely from the plurality of voices and visions which, even though they sometimes remind us of the confusion caused by the diversity of spoken languages, a bright possibility emerges. Indeed, this is the possibility of building together, of transforming diversity into a resource and of making listening and dialogue the common ground upon which to cultivate justice and fraternity. Within this shared task, Christians discover their unique role of guiding actions toward God so that, in his light, pluralism does not dissipate into disorder, but instead, through the practice of synodality, it becomes the space in which humanity rediscovers its solid foundations and its final end.
16a. We are to be servants of the coming Kingdom, instead of lords of towers destined for ruin.
I address this heartfelt appeal to all the Catholic faithful, to all Christians and to all men and women of goodwill. Let us not be afraid to get our hands dirty on the ‘construction site’ of our time. Like Nehemiah, let us pray, plan wisely and work perseveringly, placing God at the forefront of our actions and the human person at the center of our choices. Thus, the ‘rejected stones’ — the poor, the sick, the migrants and the least among us — will become the cornerstone, and a solid, welcoming common home will emerge on the earth, where love and faithfulness will finally meet, and righteousness and peace will embrace (cf. Ps 85:10). This is the blessing we implore from God; and the task that stands before us is that of being builders of communion, rather than architects of Babel. We are to be servants of the coming Kingdom, instead of lords of towers destined for ruin.Â
16b. I ask everyone to abandon the construction of yet another Tower of Babel...
… and to join forces in building up the common good, so that humanity will never lose its beauty, and the world once again will come to recognize the human heart as the place where God desires to dwell.
48. The Church’s Social Doctrine brings us to the very heart of our faith:...
… the mystery of the living God, revealed in Jesus Christ, who, as a communion of Persons — Father, Son and Holy Spirit — is love itself in relationship, expressed in the mutual gift of self and in sharing with the world. As the Council recalled, human persons are called to communion with God and ‘can fully discover their true selves only in sincere self-giving.’ Indeed their deepest vocation is to enter into the Trinitarian dynamic of love received and shared.
49. The mystery of humanity truly becomes clear
If the mystery of God as Love is the source of Social Doctrine, we see its most concrete expression in the face of Jesus Christ, the Incarnate Word. By becoming man, the Son of God enters our history and takes on human flesh, bringing with him the love that unites him to the Father and the Holy Spirit. In him, ‘the mystery of humanity truly becomes clear’ because his humanity is completely free, open to others, capable of building healthy and beautiful relationships and committed to the total gift of self. Those who believe in him are engaged in the great work of renewal that began with the mystery of his passion, death and resurrection, and they cooperate in building up the Kingdom of God, learning to embrace all men and women as brothers and sisters, children of one Father.
51a. The appreciation of human dignity
Saint John Paul II stated that, ‘this heightened sense of the dignity of the human person and of his or her uniqueness, and of the respect due to the journey of conscience, certainly represents one of the positive achievements of modern culture.’ This statement follows the line already laid out by the Second Vatican Council, which had noted a growing recognition of the sublime dignity of all persons, their superiority over material things and their universal and inviolable rights and duties. It is important to ensure that this growth in appreciation of human dignity is not obscured by the pressure of new ideologies or very powerful interests in today’s world.
71b. The principle of subsidiarity requires that such processes not be imposed from above...
… in an opaque and unilateral manner, but instead be directed toward the common good with transparency, accountability and meaningful forms of participation (including independent checks, transparency regarding algorithms, equitable access to data and avenues for recourse).
105. For AI to respect human dignity and truly serve the common good,...
… responsibility must be clearly defined at every stage: from those who design and develop these systems to those who use them and rely on them for concrete decisions. In many cases, however, the internal processes leading to a result remain opaque, making it harder to assign responsibility and correct errors. This is where accountability becomes crucial: the possibility of identifying who must ‘account’ for decisions, justify them, monitor them, and, when necessary, challenge them and remedy any harm caused.
106. It is not enough to invoke ethics in the abstract
Calling for prudence, rigorous evaluation and even, at times, a slower pace in adopting AI does not mean opposing progress; instead, it is an exercise of responsible care for the human family. This need is all the more urgent given the frequent imbalance between the speed of technological growth and the slower development of awareness, norms, safeguards and institutions capable of governing its effects. It is not enough to invoke ethics in the abstract; robust legal frameworks, independent oversight, informed users and a political system that does not abdicate its responsibility are required. Otherwise, change will be governed only by technocratic thinking and presented as necessary and inevitable, ultimately imposing rules shaped by those who control data, infrastructure and computing power.
129a. Does AI make human life on earth more human?
[T]he true alternative is not between enthusiasm and fear, but between two paths of development: a progress that serves individuals and peoples, or a progress that subjects them to the mentality of power. 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?’ If the answer is yes, then we can recognize it as an opportunity to be embraced responsibly, on a path of patient, shared reconstruction, akin to the rebuilding of Jerusalem narrated in the Book of Nehemiah.
137a. Truth is a common good
Our first task is neither to demonize nor idolize technological tools, but to utilize them on the basis of a fundamental principle, namely that truth is a common good and not the property of those with power or influence. We must therefore promote an ecology of communication. On the level of public policy, this entails establishing norms so that the decision-making behind content selection and its development becomes more transparent and protects personal data. Regarding social and cultural aspects, this requires a strengthening of intermediary organizations, serious journalism and forums for debate, where reasoned argumentation and verification carry greater weight than immediate reaction.
137b. For families and schools...
… there is a growing need for new educational awareness and for formation concerning the proper and critical use of digital tools, AI and online commercial and financial platforms. In universities, the principal challenge lies in the integration of knowledge, cultivating both the capacity to connect and synthesize knowledge in order to grasp complexity, and the skills necessary to verify facts.
165. The family is a primary social good....
… Founded on the enduring union between a man and a woman, it is the first environment in which all persons develop their potential, become aware of their dignity and learn the earliest forms of truth and goodness, internalizing the habits that prepare them for life in society. As the first natural society, endowed with foundational rights, the family is the fundamental and irreplaceable cell of every community organization. Consequently, when political projects and major economic decisions relegate the family to a marginal or secondary role, the authentic growth of the entire social body is compromised.
233. No AI can create personhood, revealed in a human face
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 technological processes that limit our freedom and responsibility. The dignity inscribed in each of us by the Holy Spirit can also be seen in our capacity to reflect critically, choose and love freely, and form authentic relationships. 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. It is the mystery of ‘recapitulation’: the certainty that the Father has decreed to bring all things, those in heaven and those on earth, back to Christ, the one Head (cf. Eph 1:10). In this plan, nothing will be lost that is authentically human. Indeed, everything will be purified and reunited in the One, who gathers every fragment of life, every tear and every authentically human achievement, rescuing them from nothingness and delivering them, redeemed, to the Father.
239. Let us cultivate relationships!
… In an era that favors speed and fragmentation, the human person still yearns to receive care and recognition from attentive minds, kind words and hands capable of tenderness. The digital culture multiplies connections and offers new opportunities for interaction; yet, the human heart retains an irrevocable need for genuine closeness. I invite everyone to cherish places and times where physical presence remains crucial, such as shared meals, Christian community gatherings, time spent with the lonely and serving the poor. These are signs of a humanity that continues to believe that every person’s body is a dwelling place of God and a temple of the Holy Spirit. It is precisely this covenant between glory and fragility that becomes the criterion for evaluating the anthropological models offered by contemporary culture.
CNS photo/Lola Gomez
10 More Questions to Ask Before Using Generative AI
- Is a relationship with God at the center of this effort, like Nehemiah’s effort to rebuild the walls of Jerusalem?
- Will this help me work together with other people who have their own voices and visions?
- Am I trying to become a servant of the Kingdom of God?
- Would this usage of AI grow my appreciation of human dignity?
- Would it make my life “more human”? Would it make my life more worthy of man?
- Have I been educated about how generative AI works, what it really does, and how it impacts users?
- Have I been formed to understand what makes an argument reasonable, and how to verify factual claims?
- Has my attention span been improving lately?
- Have I been growing more resilient in the face of obstacles?
- Am I spending more time in the physical presence of other people, especially loved ones?
If you did not answer “yes” to all of these, it’s probably not a good idea to use it.
Choose your next step:
Resources for a healthy understanding of
AI
Magnifica Humanitas
Pope Leo XIV
Preseving Human Voices and Faces
Pope Leo XIV
AI as a Very Deepfake
DC Schindler
Antiqua et Nova
Vatican Dicasteries
Catholic Faith + AI Resources
Daughters of St. Paul
DELTA
University of Notre Dame
© 2026 United States Conference of Catholic Bishops






