The first encyclical of the pontificate of Leo XIV, Magnifica Humanitas, published this May 25, contains an achievement even prior to any detailed doctrinal analysis of its content: having identified, right at the beginning of the pontificate, what is the great historical question of our time. And that, in itself, was not obvious. We are living through a transformation of dimensions probably greater than those that a large part of society is interpreting. We are not facing a simple technological acceleration or anecdotal phenomena of digital consumption. It is not another evolution of the internet, nor a passing fad comparable to Mark Zuckerberg’s failed metaverse. What is happening with artificial intelligence represents a paradigm shift with anthropological, social, economic, and moral implications of enormous depth, affecting the very concept of work, creativity, truth, knowledge, human autonomy, and, ultimately, of personhood. That the new Pope has understood this immediately constitutes, probably, the first great strategic achievement of his pontificate.
And not only for having addressed the topic, but for the specific way in which he has done so. Leo XIV has not presented a superficial, fearful, or caricatured reflection on artificial intelligence. The encyclical reveals, even from a first reading, that there is a real awareness of the historical moment in which we find ourselves, something that today remains extraordinarily uncommon even among political leaders, businesspeople, or specialized intellectuals. It is especially significant that the Vatican has chosen to place this encyclical in dialogue with Anthropic, precisely the company that in recent weeks has most profoundly altered the global technological balance. The emergence of its latest models has generated an impact that has even partially displaced the narrative and technical leadership of OpenAI. Anthropic today represents one of the most advanced and sophisticated expressions of the contemporary development of artificial intelligence, and that Rome has identified exactly there the center of gravity of the debate conveys the impression that there is a precise understanding of where history is truly moving.
For decades, the Church had been losing centrality in the great intellectual and anthropological debates of the West. Not because it had abandoned its doctrine, but because it often arrived late to decisive discussions or appeared disconnected from new cultural and technological languages. That is why it is especially relevant that, in this case, the Vatican has not appeared from the periphery of the debate, but exactly at its core. Leo XIV has once again placed the Church at the forefront of contemporary anthropological reflection, something that just a few years ago seemed extremely difficult, almost improbable, for an institution that many considered doomed to always react with delay to major cultural transformations.
Probably, with the passage of years, this initial move of Robert Prevost’s pontificate will come to be considered one of the most intelligent and far-sighted gestures of the Church at the beginning of the 21st century. Because even before proposing concrete solutions—which may be discussed, nuanced, or developed—it has demonstrated the capacity to correctly identify the magnitude of the problem. And that is the true starting point of any serious intellectual leadership: understanding before others what the central issue of the historical time being lived is.
There will still be time to analyze in detail the technical precision of the encyclical, the depth of its proposals, or the concrete scope of its moral and social solutions. But the first relevant judgment must be made beforehand. Leo XIV has shown that he has understood the historical time he has been called to govern, something especially relevant in a context of accelerated civilizational transformation, where a large part of the political, cultural, and business elites continue to treat artificial intelligence as a secondary or purely instrumental issue.
For Catholics, moreover, there is here an inevitably spiritual reading. In the face of unprecedented challenges and changes that are potentially disruptive to the very conception of the human being, the Church does not appear absent or disoriented. The Vicar of Christ is looking directly at the center of the problem and attempting to offer coordinates from doctrine, tradition, and Christian anthropology. In a moment of global technological uncertainty, that presence alone already constitutes a fact of enormous importance.