I WELCOME the timely encyclical letter (an extended letter addressed to all people) of Pope Leo XIV – the first of his pontificate – titled Magnifica Humanitas: On the Protection of the Human Person in the Age of Artificial Intelligence, that was published on May 25.
The contemporary debate about AI is marked not only by rapid technological progress, but a deepening sense of public unease, particularly among white-collar workers, especially the younger ones.
Many professionals – once confident that education and expertise would guarantee stability – now face the unsettling possibility that AI systems can replicate or replace core aspects of their work.
This shift has contributed to a broader climate of distrust, reflected in surveys across the globe showing widespread scepticism about whether AI will truly benefit humanity.
Yet this distrust is not simply resistance to innovation. It reflects a more fundamental concern:
Who is shaping AI, and in whose interests?
When technological development appears to be driven primarily by corporate priorities – efficiency, profit and scale – many people feel excluded from decisions that profoundly affect their lives.
Concerns about job security, social inequality and even environmental sustainability – highlighted by the growing energy demands for AI infrastructure, such as Ireland’s data centres today consuming 22% of national electricity, up from 5% in 2015 – only deepen this unease.
Within this context, Pope Leo’s Magnifica Humanitas offers a way of reorienting the discussion.
A first perusal indicates that rather than focusing on technical details, it proposes a moral framework for evaluating AI – one that speaks directly to the fears, hopes and responsibilities shaping the present moment.
Thus, the Pope writes: “The magnificent humanity created by God stands before a decisive choice: to erect a new Tower of Babel or to build the holy city, where God and humanity dwell together.”
The encyclical’s key principles are as follows:
Human dignity as the non-negotiable criterion
At the heart of this framework is the conviction that human dignity must be the measure of all technological development.
For Pope Leo XIV, AI is not to be judged by its power or efficiency, but by its impact on the human person. This principle speaks directly to the anxieties of white-collar workers.
The fear of job displacement is not only about income; it is about losing a sense of purpose and identity.
Work is a central expression of human dignity, and any technological system that undermines this must be critically examined.
AI cannot be allowed to reduce individuals to mere functions within a system or to disposable units of productivity.
Orientation and discernment, not rejection of AI
Importantly, the encyclical does not condemn AI outright.
Like Pope Francis before him, Pope Leo XIV recognises that human creativity – including technological innovation – is a genuine good. AI has the potential to advance healthcare, education and social cooperation in powerful ways.
However, this potential will not realise itself automatically. It requires orientation and discernment.
The text rightly warns about an approach to development in which ‘workers are forced to adapt to the speed of machines, rather than machines being designed to help workers’.
The problem is not that AI exists, but that it can develop without sufficient ethical direction.
Rather than asking whether AI is good or bad, the encyclical invites a deeper question: how is it being shaped, and to what ends?
This approach offers an alternative to both uncritical enthusiasm and unbridled fear.
It acknowledges the legitimacy of public concern while insisting that the future of AI remains open to human guidance.
Ethical principles, not technical solutions
The Church does not claim to design algorithms or regulate markets. Instead, it contributes something different: a set of universal ethical principles that can help guide decision-making across cultures and sectors.
Building on the tradition of Catholic social teaching inaugurated by the last Pope Leo XIII in his 1891 encyclical letter and masterpiece of social science, Rerum Novarum (Of New Things), these include the primacy of the human person, the pursuit of the common good, solidarity with the vulnerable and a commitment to justice and transparency.
In a world where technological change often outpaces regulation, these principles provide a stable foundation for reflection and action.
They also challenge the assumption that technological progress is inherently beneficial.
Progress must be evaluated, not assumed.
As Pope Francis has emphasised, innovation without ethics risks becoming detached from human well-being.
Human responsibility and oversight
One of the most important concerns addressed by Pope Leo is the temptation to delegate responsibility to machines.
As AI systems become more sophisticated, there is a risk that human decision-makers may rely on them uncritically.
The encyclical firmly rejects this possibility. Human responsibility cannot be outsourced.
AI can assist, inform and enhance decision-making, but it cannot replace moral judgment.
Systems that affect people’s lives - whether in employment, healthcare or governance - must remain accountable to human oversight. This insistence directly addresses public distrust.
People are more likely to accept AI when they know that humans remain responsible for its outcomes, rather than being subject to opaque and unchallengeable systems.
Shared governance, not monopolies
Another major source of concern in the current debate is the concentration of technological power.
AI development is often dominated by a small number of corporations, raising questions about accountability and fairness.
Pope Leo calls for shared governance of AI.
Technologies that shape the future of society should not be controlled by a narrow set of interests.
Instead, their development and use should involve broader participation, including governments, communities and civil society.
This principle speaks directly to the widespread feeling of exclusion that fuels distrust. If people are to trust AI, they must have a voice in shaping it.
Governance must be transparent, inclusive and oriented toward the common good rather than private gain.
The Church speaks from its own experience and an ongoing path of conversion
Finally, the encyclical speaks with a tone of humility.
The Church does not present itself as possessing all the answers. Instead, it recognises its own history as one of learning, adaptation and ongoing conversion.
This perspective is important in a rapidly changing technological landscape.
It acknowledges complexity and uncertainty, while still offering clear moral guidance.
It invites dialogue rather than imposing solutions, and urges all actors – religious, political and economic – to continual reflection.
Rebuilding trust in the age of AI
The integration of these principles offers a path toward addressing the deepening distrust surrounding AI.
Public concern – especially among young white-collar workers – is not simply a problem to be managed; it is a signal that something essential is at stake.
People are asking whether their dignity will be respected, whether their work will remain meaningful, whether their environment will be protected and whether they will have a say in shaping the systems that affect their lives.
Pope Leo’s contribution suggests that the answer to these questions depends on the moral direction of AI.
Technology alone cannot determine that direction. It requires human judgement, ethical reflection and shared responsibility.
In the end, the debate is not about whether AI should exist. It is about what kind of future it will create.
If guided by dignity, responsibility and the common good, AI can become a tool for human flourishing.
If not, it risks deepening the very problems that fuel today’s distrust.
The challenge, then, is clear: to ensure that as AI grows in power, it remains firmly rooted in the values that make a truly human future possible.
As a first step, I encourage everyone to read Magnifica Humanitas.