https://pixabay.com Gerd Altmann
Yesterday I read something I didn’t expect to read. The Pope’s 20260515-magnifica-humanitas.
You can find it here.
Why? I read a news story that said Tolkien was quoted in it. So I thought, “I have to see this.”
And what I did see was quite different from what I expected.
The first chapter reviewed the history of the Encyclical Letters of the past and was surprisingly interesting in-and-of itself. The Roman Catholic Church has struggled trying to balance belief with technology many times over the centuries. And this struggle is well documented in the Encyclical Letters of past Popes and the review was concise enough to make good reading.
This was my first surprise in reading the Encyclical.
The second chapter reviewed the social doctrine of the church in the past and brought it into alignment with the technology of today. The second surprise was the amount of alignment I found that I had with the discussion of human development. The statement, “Technological innovations, including artificial intelligence, are not neutral, for they can either foster participation and justice or exacerbate inequality, control and exclusion. For this reason, they must be evaluated by asking a crucial question: Do they truly help individuals and peoples to become more humane and fraternal, while respecting our common home and future generations?” aligns surprisingly well with the essays that I’ve been writing.
The third chapter is intriguingly titled, “THE GRANDEUR OF HUMANITY IN LIGHT OF THE PROMISES OF AI”. I rubbed my hands together and dug into the chapter, and came out… Not enlightened, but surprised again. The depth of understanding of the implications of the technologies and the obvious call for governance, though it was not termed as such, impressed me.
The one statement that stands out to me is, “When such power is concentrated in the hands of a few, it tends to become opaque and evade public oversight, increasing the risk of distorted forms of development that give rise to new dependencies, exclusions, manipulations and inequalities.”
Clearly the Pope has thought long and hard on these topics.
Chapter four goes on to look at, “Safeguarding Humanity at a Time of Transformation.” And discusses the concepts of truth, the need for work and the difference between freedom when responsibility is not taken for taking advantage of human weaknesses. The manipulation of people through digital attention and treating people as a means to an end lead the Pope to discuss modern forms of slavery — and how this has impacted the development of technologies.
He points out that this new form of colonialism benefits few and marginalizes many others. “Every seemingly immediate and flawless response is the result of a long chain of mediation, involving vast networks of natural resources, energy infrastructure and, above all, people.” And people, not just Catholics, are the focus of the entire document.
Chapter five, “The Culture of Power and the Civilization of Love” goes on to discuss the fracturing of the world today, but is a call for people to work together and not apart. It is in this chapter that the Pope quotes Gandalf from The Lord of the Rings. The line comes from “The Last Debate,” as Gandalf reminds the captains of the West that it is not their part to master all the tides of the world, but to do what lies within their own time and field of responsibility. The Pope in invoking this quote invites all to share. To talk (revive dialogue). To reject the normalization of violence as a solution to a problem. To be a part of the world, no matter what your belief.
He makes this call to everyone in a section titled, “We can all do our part”. Indicating that responsibility is for everyone, and the thought that the problems are too big (or too small) to matter is a “polite form of resignation, often disguised as realism.” He doesn’t mince words.
After I finished reading this document, I thought a bit about what it contained. I expected to find a religious document about artificial intelligence from what popular media presented. I did find that. But I also found a document whose argument held together across technology, labour, attention, truth, exploitation, violence, and responsibility.
I also found something broader — and much more significant: a public argument that technology must be judged by what it does to people, not by what it promises to do for systems. That argument does not belong only to Catholics. It belongs to anyone who still believes responsibility cannot be automated away.
Top comments (0)