TL;DR
Pope Leo XIV released his first encyclical, Magnifica Humanitas, on May 25, setting out a Catholic social teaching response to AI. The Vatican presentation included Anthropic co-founder Christopher Olah, while OpenAI, Google DeepMind and xAI were absent from the announced AI speaker lineup, making the launch’s guest list part of the story.
Pope Leo XIV released his first encyclical, Magnifica Humanitas, on May 25, 2026, warning that AI power must serve human dignity and that technology is “never neutral”; the Vatican presentation included Anthropic co-founder Christopher Olah, while OpenAI, Google DeepMind and xAI were not named in the announced speaker lineup.
The encyclical, signed May 15 on the 135th anniversary of Rerum novarum, is Pope Leo XIV’s formal statement on safeguarding the human person in the age of artificial intelligence. The Vatican text frames AI as a matter of dignity, work, power, truth, freedom and war.
A Vatican News announcement said the May 25 presentation would include the Pope, Cardinals Víctor Manuel Fernández and Michael Czerny, theologians Anna Rowlands and Leocadie Lushombo, and Christopher Olah, Anthropic co-founder and head of AI interpretability research. The same notice did not list representatives from OpenAI, Google DeepMind or xAI.
The source material’s “empty chairs” argument rests on that contrast: Anthropic was visible at the launch, while other leading AI labs were not part of the official speaker roster. That does not establish that the Vatican endorsed Anthropic, but it affects how the event is read because the encyclical says technology reflects those who build, fund, govern and use it.
Technology is never neutral — and neither were the empty chairs
Pope Leo XIV’s first encyclical casts AI as this century’s Rerum novarum moment. He presented it personally — with Anthropic’s co-founder in the room. OpenAI, Google DeepMind & xAI were not. For a “broadside against AI companies,” that guest list is itself an argument.
A Rerum novarum for the age of AI
The signing date wasn’t incidental. Leo XIV chose the 135th anniversary of Leo XIII’s 1891 encyclical — and, by taking the Leonine name, cast himself as the pope who answers AI as Leo XIII answered industry.
The same move, 135 years apart
AI ethics books for developers
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
The Ethics of AI: Power, Critique, Responsibility
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Five chapters, one worry: concentration
The recurring anxiety is that AI’s power lands “in the hands of only a few” — and that a more moral AI isn’t enough “if that morality is determined by a few.”
A dynamic doctrine, faithful to the Gospel
Situating AI in the Church’s social teaching — the living tradition from Rerum novarum onward.
Foundations & principles
Human dignity that is “neither acquired nor earned”; the common good; the universal destination of goods — tech must not be held by a few.
Technology & dominance
The “technocratic paradigm.” AI can simulate a person but has no moral conscience or empathy. Calls to “disarm” AI from the logic of competition.
Safeguarding humanity: truth, work, freedom
The “new ways” of working aren’t always better; AI too often makes workers adapt to machines. Warns of an “architecture of visibility.”
The culture of power & the civilization of love
The hardest charge: “no algorithm can make war morally acceptable.” Argues even “just war” theory must now be overcome.
AI regulation and policy guides
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Mastering Deep Learning with PyTorch: From Vision and Language Models to Diffusion Systems — Covering CNNs, Transformers, Generative Models, and Scalable … Science and machine learning Book 1)
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Who was in the room — and who should have been
Leo XIV presented the encyclical personally (popes usually delegate). Among the AI experts: Anthropic’s Chris Olah. The other frontier labs? Empty chairs. Tap each seat.
The presentation · May 25, 2026
A defensible single invite — or a diluted broadside? Press play, then judge.
AI transparency tools
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Catholic Sprouts – Catholic Social Teaching for Youth – Catholic Worship Planners & Books, Catholic Education, Printed with Full Church Approval
THE TRUTH FOR CATHOLIC KIDS: Addresses with authority all of the difficult modern social and moral issues.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
A broadside delivered to one delegate
The Washington Post read the encyclical as one that “fires a broadside against AI companies.” A reckoning aimed at an industry is weakened when one member — the most safety-branded one — is present to receive it.
The encyclical’s hardest charge is about AI and war — and it implicates the labs that weren’t there.
Its most uncompromising passages condemn AI-enabled weapons and the lowering of the threshold for violence. But that lands hardest on the defense-entangled players and the leaders most explicit about military & geopolitical ambitions — not the lab that showed up.
Account vs. anoint
One sympathetic guest tilts it from “the Church holding the industry to account” toward “the Church beside its preferred firm.”
Concentration, again
A text whose deepest fear is power “determined by a few” launched by elevating one company as chosen interlocutor.
ethical AI development kits
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
AI and human dignity educational materials
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Two things are true at once
The criticism is of the exclusivity, not the inclusion. Olah in the room was fitting; Anthropic alone was incomplete.
The most significant AI reckoning yet by a global moral institution
It grounds a critique of concentration, dehumanized work & algorithmic warfare in a tradition stretching back to 1891. Its core insight — technology carries its makers’ values — is exactly the right place to start.
A broadside should be delivered to the industry, not its most palatable face
The choice to present alongside Anthropic alone — defensible, probably well-intentioned — undercut the encyclical’s own insight about whose values get associated with the message.
A beginning, not an endpoint
The same month, Leo XIV approved an Interdicasterial Commission on Artificial Intelligence — a standing body with room for many voices over time. If it brings the whole industry into uncomfortable dialogue, the narrow first launch reads as a first step, not a pattern.
Why It Matters
The document matters beyond Catholic audiences because it puts the Vatican’s moral authority behind calls for public accountability in AI. Its concerns overlap with current disputes over model control, military use, labor automation, data access and the influence of private companies over public life.
The guest list also matters. A launch criticizing concentrated technological power can appear narrower when one safety-branded company is represented and other leading labs are absent from the visible lineup. That is an interpretation, not a confirmed Vatican policy choice, but it shapes the public meaning of the event.
Background
Leo XIV dated the encyclical May 15, the anniversary of Pope Leo XIII’s 1891 Rerum novarum, the landmark Catholic text on labor, capital and industrial society. Vatican News said Leo XIV drew a direct parallel between that industrial-era rupture and today’s AI systems.
Magnifica Humanitas argues that patents, algorithms, data, platforms and computing infrastructure can create new imbalances when held by a few. It also says AI systems do not possess conscience, warns that workers may be forced to adapt to machines, and rejects the use of algorithms for lethal or irreversible decisions.
“technology is never neutral, because it takes on the characteristics of those who devise, finance, regulate and use it”
— Pope Leo XIV, Magnifica Humanitas
“artificial intelligence needs to be disarmed”
— Pope Leo XIV, Vatican presentation covered by Vatican News
“No algorithm can make war morally acceptable”
— Pope Leo XIV, Magnifica Humanitas
What Remains Unclear
It remains unclear whether OpenAI, Google DeepMind or xAI were invited, declined, or were excluded from the May 25 presentation; the Vatican notices reviewed name Olah as the AI company speaker but do not explain the choices behind the lineup. It is also unclear how the encyclical will affect Catholic institutions, regulators or AI firms in practice.
What’s Next
The next phase is response: Vatican offices, bishops’ conferences, Catholic universities and policy forums will decide how to apply the encyclical to procurement, classroom use, labor policy, data rules and weapons systems. The public record will also be shaped by whether the Vatican engages a wider set of AI developers after the May 25 launch.
Key Questions
What did Pope Leo XIV release?
He released Magnifica Humanitas, his first encyclical, on May 25, 2026. The document applies Catholic social teaching to artificial intelligence and warns against concentrated technological power.
Was Anthropic the only AI company represented?
The official Vatican speaker list named Anthropic co-founder Christopher Olah. It did not list speakers from OpenAI, Google DeepMind or xAI.
Does the encyclical say AI is evil?
No. The document says technology is not inherently evil, but it argues that technology is not neutral because it reflects the people and institutions that design, fund, regulate and use it.
Why does the Rerum novarum anniversary matter?
Rerum novarum was the Church’s major response to industrial-era labor and capital conflicts. By signing Magnifica Humanitas on its 135th anniversary, Leo XIV framed AI as a comparable social rupture.
What remains unknown about the empty chairs?
The public notices do not say whether other AI labs were invited, declined, or were left out. That gap is why the launch’s optics remain part of the debate.
Source: Thorsten Meyer AI
