The Pope isn’t AGI-pilled | The VergeSkip to main contentThe homepageThe VergeThe Verge logo.The VergeThe Verge logo.TechReviewsScienceEntertainmentAIPolicyNotificationsNotificationsHamburger Navigation ButtonThe homepageThe VergeThe Verge logo.NotificationsNotificationsHamburger Navigation ButtonNavigation DrawerThe VergeThe Verge logo.Login / Sign UpcloseCloseSearchTechExpandAmazonAppleFacebookGoogleMicrosoftSamsungBusinessSee all techReviewsExpandSmart Home ReviewsPhone ReviewsTablet ReviewsHeadphone ReviewsSee all reviewsScienceExpandSpaceEnergyEnvironmentHealthSee all scienceEntertainmentExpandTV ShowsMoviesAudioSee all entertainmentAIExpandOpenAIAnthropicSee all AIPolicyExpandAntitrustPoliticsLawSecuritySee all policyGadgetsExpandLaptopsPhonesTVsHeadphonesSpeakersWearablesSee all gadgetsVerge ShoppingExpandBuying GuidesDealsGift GuidesSee all shoppingGamingExpandXboxPlayStationNintendoSee all gamingStreamingExpandDisneyHBONetflixYouTubeCreatorsSee all streamingTransportationExpandElectric CarsAutonomous CarsRide-sharingScootersSee all transportationFeaturesVerge VideoExpandTikTokYouTubeInstagramPodcastsExpandDecoderThe VergecastVersion HistoryNewslettersArchivesStoreVerge Product UpdatesSubscribeFacebookThreadsInstagramYoutubeRSSThe VergeThe Verge logo.The Pope isn’t AGI-pilledNotificationsNotificationsComments DrawerNotificationsCommentsLoading commentsGetting the conversation ready...AICloseAIPosts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.FollowFollowSee All AIReportCloseReportPosts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.FollowFollowSee All ReportThe Pope isn’t AGI-pilledHis call to arms doesn’t mention the superintelligent AI many insist is coming — but there are good reasons not to.His call to arms doesn’t mention the superintelligent AI many insist is coming — but there are good reasons not to.by Hayden FieldCloseHayden FieldSenior AI ReporterPosts from this author will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.FollowFollowSee All by Hayden FieldMay 27, 2026, 12:00 PM UTCLinkShareGiftGetty ImagesHayden FieldCloseHayden FieldPosts from this author will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.FollowFollowSee All by Hayden Field is The Verge’s senior AI reporter. An AI beat reporter for more than five years, her work has also appeared in CNBC, MIT Technology Review, Wired UK, and other outlets.On Monday, Pope Leo XIV unveiled an encyclical letter addressing the societal implications of artificial intelligence. The letter, titled Magnifica Humanitas, warned that the “use of AI is never a purely technical matter: when it enters processes that affect people’s lives, it touches on rights, opportunities, status and freedom.” Alongside him was Anthropic cofounder and interpretability team lead Christopher Olah, representing a partnership between the Catholic Church and one of the biggest players in AI.The letter elicited a wide range of reactions from in and around the tech industry. Nearly everyone believed the document would be influential. Some critics questioned whether it went far enough, and others believed it should have discussed artificial general intelligence (AGI), which many companies insist is imminent. Still others thought the pope was spot-on.“It was a pretty clear subtweet of big tech CEOs who are out here blatantly declaring that they’re eliminating staff to replace ‘lower-value human capital’ with AI, and who are also buying their way into the political rooms where it happens in order to write the rules in their favor,” said Sacha Haworth, executive director of the Tech Oversight Project.The pope’s encyclical comes amid a backlash to AI’s growing power. Six in 10 US adults feel they have “little to no control” of how AI is used in their everyday lives, protests against the construction of data centers are increasingly common, and some people have even attempted attacks on AI CEOs themselves.RelatedThe race to AGI-pill the popePope Leo calls for being ‘profoundly human’ in the age of AIAs Olah’s appearance suggests, the pope’s missive describes AI as a technology that can have positive applications, and its tone earned mixed reactions. “I’m glad it’s critical of the AI companies though I think it should be more so,” Daniel Kokotajlo, an AI researcher and former OpenAI employee who is behind the nonprofit AI Futures Project, told The Verge. Conversely, Dr. Guru Sethupathy, GM of AI governance at software company Optro, was encouraged by indications that “Pope Leo and the Vatican are not against AI but rather how to pursue a responsible path that is best for humanity.”The decision to partner with the Vatican was a strategic move by Anthropic, a company that’s built its business on a carefully curated reputation of being a more trustworthy alternative than its competitors. Anthropic famously spent the last few months embroiled in a battle with the Pentagon over limits to military AI use, and a connection with another powerful institution could help bolster its status — and let it help shape future Vatican recommendations.One controversial aspect of the document, in many tech circles, was that it made no mention whatsoever of AGI or superintelligence; it allows that AI systems may “often surpass human intelligence in speed and computational capacity” but says they “lack the affective, relational and spiritual perspective through which human beings grow in wisdom.” Dean W. Ball, a senior fellow at the Foundation for American Innovation, wrote on X that the encyclical “would be much improved if it were less enamored of the traditional academia/civil society talking points on AI … and more engaged with where AI is headed. But instead of doing that, the encyclical dodges in the deepest sense, denying that AI ‘really thinks’ or ‘really learns.’” Kokotajlo also said he wished the letter took the possibility of AGI and superintelligence “more seriously.”But the document isn’t meant to do everything, several people in tech and in the Catholic world told The Verge.“It’s not about AI. It’s about protecting the human person in the age of AI.”“This is a major Catholic social teaching document,” Sister Susan Francois, assistant congregation leader of the Sisters of St. Joseph of Peace, said. “It’s not about AI. It’s about protecting the human person in the age of AI.” Brian Boyd, the US faith liaison for the Future of Life Institute and an instructor of Catholic social teaching at Notre Dame Seminary, called the document “more of a call to arms than a specific set of marching orders.” The pope called throughout the encyclical to “establish adequate regulatory tools capable of upholding justice and curbing the distorting effects of technological power,” but he stopped short of endorsing specific proposals.The Tech Oversight Project’s Haworth said she views the encyclical as “setting the compass for the moral direction of the world, or at least of the Western world … You don’t have to be Catholic to see your own concerns and your own wishes and fears in this document.” She said she expects her elected leaders to take on specific concerns over AGI and do their part to hold powerful tech companies accountable, rather than for the pope’s document to be “all things for all people.” She also called it a “warning shot for leaders, for politicians, because what this document talked about is the creation of a sub-class.”For some, the encyclical’s lack of attention to AGI wasn’t a problem, since they took it as the pope focusing on the real-world impacts of AI on vulnerable communities as the technology exists today, rather than some of the potential risks ahead for humanity as a whole if and when labs hit the (largely unspecified) AGI milestone.Aaron Fulkerson, CEO of Opaque Systems, a startup that helps customers organize encrypted data, said the pope is “actually looking at the system and highlighting something that a lot of us in tech would recognize as a systemic risk to humanity. And I’m not even talking about AGI. I’m talking about our global economy.”Even before the current wave of AI, tech industry centralization could be dangerous. A problem at cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike sidelined banks, hospitals, and airlines around the world, and an outage at Amazon Web Services took down a large swath of the internet, from Reddit to Venmo. For Fulkerson, the risks to the global economy only grow as power is concentrated in the hands of a couple of AI labs.“The thing that I’ve seen in the news has been this positioning around power dynamics of the pope versus tech bros, but I think everybody’s missing the bigger story here, which is that he’s looking at a system that is intrinsically risky,” Fulkerson said. “We’re sleepwalking into a world in which one or two labs are the cognitive infrastructure of every industry on earth — that means humanity is far less resilient, not more capable.”In the encyclical, the pope compared AI to the Tower of Babel, a structure he describes as “supported by a uniformity that eliminated diversity and that chose homogenization over communion.”. The world must “avoid the ‘Babel syndrome,’” he wrote: “the idolatry of profit that sacrifices the weak, a uniformity that neutralizes differences, and the pretense that a single language — even a digital one — can translate everything, including the mystery of the person, into data and performance.” In his reckoning, AI became not just a new technology, but a Biblical struggle. “The risk of dehumanization,” he wrote, “is an ancient and ever-new temptation that today takes on a technical guise.” The weight of those statements, not the technical specifics, is likely to be its lasting impact.Follow topics and authors from this story to see more like this in your personalized homepage feed and to receive email updates.Hayden FieldCloseHayden FieldSenior AI ReporterPosts from this author will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.FollowFollowSee All by Hayden FieldAICloseAIPosts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.FollowFollowSee All AIReportCloseReportPosts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.FollowFollowSee All ReportMost PopularMost PopularJony Ive’s Ferrari looks nothing like a FerrariUber president says AI spending is getting ‘harder to justify’Google Health is here, but a lot of people want their Fitbit app back insteadNvidia has retired its GeForce Control Panel app after 20 yearsYou’re about to feel the AI money squeezeThe Verge DailyA free daily digest of the news that matters most.Email (required)Sign UpBy submitting your email, you agree to our Terms and Privacy Notice. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.Advertiser Content FromThis is the title for the native adMore in AIThe AI fight brewing inside The New York TimesDid the Pope use AI to write about the dangers of AI?PlaySundar Pichai on AI, the future of search, and what’s happening to the webNobody wants to tell me why they only listen to their own Suno slopAI warfare is already hereUber president says AI spending is getting ‘harder to justify’The AI fight brewing inside The New York TimesMia SatoAn hour agoDid the Pope use AI to write about the dangers of AI?Jay Peters and Hayden Field12:38 AM UTCPlaySundar Pichai on AI, the future of search, and what’s happening to the webNilay PatelMay 26Nobody wants to tell me why they only listen to their own Suno slopTerrence O'BrienMay 26AI warfare is already hereHayden FieldMay 26Uber president says AI spending is getting ‘harder to justify’Jess WeatherbedMay 26Advertiser Content FromThis is the title for the native adTop StoriesMay 26Jony Ive’s Ferrari looks nothing like a FerrariAn hour agoThe new Razr Ultra isn’t your average phone — for better and worseAn hour agoThe AI fight brewing inside The New York TimesMay 26Sony’s sloppy Spider-Man universe gets even messier with Spider-Noir27 minutes agoYouTube is putting AI labels where you’ll actually see them11 minutes agoIt’s going to be a while before you can play Dragon Quest XII.The VergeThe Verge logo.FacebookThreadsInstagramYoutubeRSSContactTip UsCommunity GuidelinesArchivesAboutEthics StatementHow We Rate and Review ProductsCookie SettingsTerms of UsePrivacy NoticeCookie PolicyLicensing FAQAccessibilityPlatform Status© 2026 Vox Media, LLC. All Rights ReservedNotifications DrawerThe VergeThe Verge logo.Sign in to see your notifications or create an account to join the conversation.Sign in

Pope Leo XIV released an encyclical letter titled Magnifica Humanitas to address the societal implications of artificial intelligence, warning that the use of AI transcends purely technical matters, touching upon fundamental concepts such as rights, opportunities, status, and freedom. This document was released alongside Christopher Olah, cofounder of Anthropic and lead of its interpretability team, signifying a partnership between the Catholic Church and a major entity in the AI field. The document generated a varied response within the technology sector, with some critics questioning its depth, while others felt it was highly relevant, offering a subtle critique aimed at technology leaders who purportedly replace human capital with AI and exert influence to shape regulatory environments.

The encyclical arose amidst increasing public concern regarding AI's growing power, evidenced by public protests against data center construction and direct actions against AI executives. Despite the heavy ethical focus, the text deliberately avoided specific discourse on artificial general intelligence or superintelligence. Instead, it focused on the essential human element, noting that AI lacks the affective, relational, and spiritual perspective necessary for human wisdom development. This approach was supported by figures like Dr. Guru Sethupathy, who felt the letter encouraged a path toward responsible governance rather than outright opposition to AI.

Anthropic’s decision to collaborate with the Vatican appears to have been a strategic move intended to enhance its reputation as a trustworthy alternative in the competitive AI landscape. While some researchers, such as Daniel Kokotajlo, advocated for a deeper engagement with potential risks like AGI, others, like Sister Susan Francois, viewed the document primarily as a call to protect the human person in the age of AI rather than a specific set of technical marching orders.

The letter invoked a profound analogy, comparing the development of AI to the Tower of Babel, suggesting that the uniformity of certain systems risks eliminating diversity and leading to a homogenization that sacrifices communion. The text cautions against the "idolatry of profit" and the equating of everything, including the mystery of the person, with data and performance, suggesting that the risk of dehumanization is an ancient temptation taking on a new technical guise.

Beyond the immediate AI context, the underlying message addressed systemic risks within the global economy. The author suggests that the concentration of power within a few AI laboratories poses a systemic threat, warning that humanity risks becoming less resilient if cognitive infrastructure becomes concentrated in the hands of a few entities. This perspective implies that the focus should be on establishing adequate regulatory tools to curb technological power and uphold justice, rather than focusing solely on future theoretical milestones like superintelligence.