Pope Leo XIV has issued the first major theological text of his papacy, warning about the growing power of artificial intelligence and calling for stronger regulation of the technology.

Released Monday, the 42,300-word encyclical “Magnifica Humanitas” marks Pope Leo’s most sweeping statement yet on the promise and dangers of AI, a topic he has repeatedly spoken about in the year since his election. Framed as an appeal for the defense of humanity in a rapidly automating world, the text urges governments, corporations, and individuals to slow the rate of technological development and ensure that AI remains subject to ethical and political oversight. He presented the encyclical at the Vatican alongside Christopher Olah, a co-founder of Anthropic, in a symbolic gesture of dialogue between Church leadership and the AI industry.  

The pope emphasized in the document that he is not opposed to innovation. Rather than rejecting technological progress, he wrote that “technology should not be considered, in itself, as a force antagonistic to humanity,” but instead must be guided by responsible and ethical use. But he warned that without stronger safeguards, artificial intelligence could deepen inequality, weaken human agency, and shift critical decisions increasingly out of human hands. 

“Calling for prudence, rigorous evaluation and even, at times, a slower pace in adopting AI does not mean opposing progress,” Leo wrote. “Instead, it is an exercise of responsible care for the human family.”

The Pope has raised AI as a central concern since early in his papacy, telling the College of Cardinals shortly after his election that the Church would confront risks artificial intelligence posed to “human dignity, justice and labor,” a focus he has returned to in speeches throughout his first year as pontiff.

Leo’s focus on AI is also reflected in his papal name itself, which he chose in reference to Pope Leo XIII, whose 1891 encyclical “Rerum Novarum” addressed the social consequences of the Industrial Revolution and established the foundation of modern Catholic social teaching on labor and technology. Leo XIV has drawn a direct comparison between the current moment of technological development and the one his most recent namesake confronted more than a century earlier, describing AI as ushering in a “new industrial revolution.”

Here’s what to know about his first encyclical, and how it builds on those put forward by past popes.

What is an encyclical?

An encyclical is one of the most significant teaching documents a pope can issue. Traditionally written as letters to Catholic bishops and the wider church, encyclicals offer authoritative guidance on major moral, social, or political questions and often shape Catholic thought for generations, even influencing debates that reach far beyond the Vatican.

The past encyclical that Leo’s new “Magnifica Humanitas” most clearly parallels is Pope Leo XIII’s “Rerum Novarum.” Written during the Industrial Revolution, the landmark encyclical addressed workers’ rights, economic inequality, and the social consequences of rapid industrialization, advocating for labor protections while warning against both unregulated capitalism and socialism. It became a foundational text of modern Catholic social teaching, a significance that the current pope directly spoke to in his newly issued encyclical.

“With that document, my beloved predecessor gave impetus to the reflection on society, the economy and politics, which is now known as the ‘Social Doctrine of the Church,’” he wrote. “When some objected that the Church should not waste energy on worldly matters, but instead focus on communicating the message of eternal life, Leo XIII responded with realism and wisdom, saying that the proclamation of the Gospel cannot overlook the concrete lives of people.”

Leo XIV expressed his desire to “add my own voice to this living tradition” with his first encyclical, which he formally signed on May 15, exactly 135 years after “Rerum Novarum” was published—further underscoring the parallels between the documents.

“Magnifica Humanitas” also continues a broader tradition of papal texts speaking to major global issues. Pope John XXIII’s 1963 encyclical “Pacem in Terris” addressed nuclear threats and world peace during the Cold War. Pope Paul VI’s “Humanae Vitae,” issued in 1968, sparked decades of debate over birth control and church authority. More recently, Pope Francis’ 2015 environment-focused encyclical “Laudato Si’” framed climate change as a moral and spiritual issue. 

What Pope Leo warns about—and pushes for—in “Magnifica Humanitas”

In the encyclical, Leo outlined risks he believes artificial intelligence poses and proposed responses the government, companies, and broader society could take to address them. 

Echoing the worker-centered concerns of “Rerum Noarum,” he warned that rapid automation could displace workers and reshape labor markets in ways that would risk leaving many in “forced inactivity,” undermining both human dignity and social stability.

“The pursuit of greater profits cannot justify choices that systematically sacrifice jobs,” he wrote. He also raised concerns about AI-generated misinformation—and particularly its impact on children and young people—as well as the concentration of power in the developing technological field among a small number of companies.

Some of his strongest language in the document was directed toward the impact that AI could have in warfare. He warned that artificial intelligence is making it easier to wage conflict and allowing it to be conducted with greater psychological distance. “The growing ease with which autonomous weapons systems can be deployed,” he wrote, “makes war more ‘feasible’ and less subject to human control.”

Even as he warned against dangers posed by the technology, however, Leo also described AI’s potential as a “gift that can alleviate suffering and open up new possibilities”—provided, he contended, that it is directed toward human-centered values rather than profits or concentrated control. 

To that end, he argued that governments cannot leave the future of AI to be shaped solely by private companies or “the ‘invisible hand’ of the market.” Instead, he called for “robust legal frameworks, independent oversight, informed users and a political system that does not abdicate its responsibility” to ensure that the technology serves the common good.

He urged taking action to counter various risks he believes AI carries, including education to help people—and particularly students—better grapple with increasing AI use and subjecting the technology’s use in warfare to “the most rigorous ethical constraints.”

Arguing that “we cannot consider AI to be morally neutral,” he also wrote that “responsibility must be clearly defined at every stage” so that it is possible to identify “who must ‘account’ for decisions, justify them, monitor them, and, when necessary, challenge them and remedy any harm caused.”

Beyond regulatory safeguards, he called for what he described as “disarming” AI by “freeing” it from economic and military competition and “monopolistic control” and exposing it to wider discussion and debate.

“What is needed,” he wrote, “is a more active political involvement that is capable of slowing things down when everything is accelerating, and of protecting the opportunities for communities still to be able to participate and ask questions.”