Magnifica Humanitas
A grounded and wise defense of human dignity in a time of rapid technological change.
Encyclical Letter Magnifica Humanitas of His Holiness Pope Leo XIV on Safeguarding the Human Person In the Time of Artificial Intelligence
By Pope Leo XIV
The Holy See, 2026
Earlier this year, I talked with a newly-minted theology MA about the relationship between AI and spirituality. I suggested Pope Leo XIV might have something to say. With the publication of the encyclical Magnifica Humanitas, he’s said it.
The Pope’s namesake, Leo XIII, led the Church during the second half of the 19th century. It was a time of social unrest triggered by technological changes: the Industrial Revolution precipitated the exploitation of workers and its counteraction in Marxism. Both dehumanized societies.
The Church’s response was Rerum Novarum (1891), an encyclical that promoted both the rights of workers and free markets. It offered a sensible middle path between anything-goes capitalism and atheistic socialism, and set the foundations for the Catholic Church’s modern social positions.
In choosing the name Leo XIV, the current Pope hinted at continuing this work. It’s certainly needed: digital technologies — and AI in particular — are at least as transformative as industrial machinery. The central question is, how will we use this technology? Will it serve the common good or dominate and exploit people?
These aren’t technical questions: they’re moral and spiritual. The Catholic Church has grappled with such issues for centuries, and Magnifica Humanitas offers an overview of that history, warts and all. The outcome is a comprehensive social framework based on several key principles:
- The common good. Work toward social well-being collectively, not by aggregating individual interests.
- The universal destination of goods. Don’t monopolize wealth and resources; steward the goods that create well-being for all.
- Subsidiarity. Delegate decision-making authority to the smallest possible unit.
- Solidarity. Recognize that our destinies are bound together and we have obligations toward each other.
- Social justice. Be fair and don’t exploit or discriminate against people. (Again, everyone has inherent worth.)
- Integral human development. Elevate people so they can participate with dignity in society.
After recapping the Church’s Social Doctrine, the encyclical applies these principles to AI and the digital economy. We can choose how to design these technologies. The Pope describes two possible approaches by using architectural metaphors drawn from scripture. One is that of the Tower of Babel: a construct meant to glorify its dominator-builders and homogenize people for the sake of power and efficiency. The other is exemplified by the lesser-known story of the rebuilding of the walls of Jerusalem:
Nehemiah, a Jew in the service of the Persian King Artaxerxes, received news of the disastrous state of his ancestral city. Before taking action, he fasted, prayed and interceded for the people. He then asked the king for permission to return to Jerusalem and, upon arriving, examined the destroyed areas in silence. 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.
Which is to say, an organic, consultative process with the people affected — as opposed to a top-down technocratic initiative. The former responds to the needs of members of the community. The latter imposes “solutions” from above, eroding their agency. Upholding human dignity is the encyclical’s foundational principle, and it’s under threat:
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. 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.
Like all technologies, digital systems are shaped by the values of the socioeconomic systems that create them. Systems that prioritize domination and personal gain over the common good pose serious risks, including growing inequality, weakened democracy, increased social unrest, environmental degradation, the emergence of new forms of slavery, and more.
And of course, there’s the ever-present risk of violence. Autonomous weapons threaten new levels of destruction. War takes a new valence when the systems deciding on the path of death aren’t human:
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. 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.
But Magnifica Humanitas is less an AI manifesto than a commentary on (and corrective of) the socioeconomic systems under which it’s emerged. Instead of systems that treat people as means to particular ends (e.g., Marxism, extreme forms of capitalism), the Pope calls for building a civilization of love grounded on justice, human rights, and basic decency.
In issuing this encyclical, the Church stakes a clear moral position. It isn’t an argument against technology, private property, or free markets. Instead, it’s a reasonable call to treat humans and our labor with dignity:
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.
You needn’t be Catholic to recognize the importance of this message. Ultimately, the question of how we’ll put AI to use isn’t technical, but moral. The stakes — human dignity, democratic participation, the distribution of power — couldn’t be higher.
May 29, 2026