Leonardo Boff*

         Upon finishing reading the first encyclical of Pope Leo XIV, we notice, with surprise, the introduction of a new style of argumentation: it is no longer the classic ecclesiastical style, with many references to Christian thinkers of the first centuries. But a new, contemporary one, which dialogues with various fields of knowledge and authors, men and women, beyond their confessional origin. It seems to us that we are reading a text by some contemporary theologian.

First of all, it is worth highlighting the generally hopeful tone of the encyclical when addressing such a controversial and thorny topic as Artificial Intelligence (AI). But it is realistic in describing the world situation of permanent belligerence: “it is not a gloomy and pessimistic description, but a necessary denunciation” (MH, 210). This denunciation becomes crystal clear when referring to “bombings against civilians, attacks on hospitals, schools or vital infrastructure, violence affecting children… scandals that wound humanity itself” (MH, 216). It is as if he were reporting on the crimes of the Israeli army in the Gaza Strip. He assumes the perspective of the victims “because it is not right to remain neutral in the face of conflicts” (MH, 216).

But when directly addressing the challenge of AI, positively, he immediately states that it always remains artificial and never replaces the natural (MH, 97). However, “it can represent a form of participation in the divine act of creation” (MH, 111). This fact implies that it must assume “a special ethical and spiritual responsibility, because each design choice expresses a vision of humanity” (MH, 111; 117; 129).

Moreover, this point is crucial in the Pope’s understanding: it is not enough to consider whether technology and AI are good or bad and their ends good, but to clarify “the underlying vision, whether they treat the human being as material to be perfected or surpassed…or their moral and social progress” (MH, 117). AI “is not morally neutral, since every technical artifact implies decisions and priorities: what it measures, what it ignores, what it optimizes, and how it classifies people and situations… One must ask “what is the design, what idea of ​​person and society is inscribed in the data and models that guide it” (MH, 104).

It is “intrinsically ambiguous, it can defend as well as attack, or the boundary between protection and aggression tends to blur” (MH, 183). It is at this point that Pope Leo makes a strong criticism of two ideologies, transhumanism and posthumanism. These “give total centrality to technology and the dream of overcoming the limits of the human condition” (MH, 116). Transhumanism wants to exponentially exacerbate human capabilities (through biomedicine, body engineering, algorithms) to be more efficient and thus achieve lucrative advantages. Posthumanism “aims to go beyond the human being and connect him in such a way to the machine and the environment an environment that would inaugurate a new stage of evolution” (MH, 116).

Here, the natural limits of human beings are disregarded, and a purely technical “salvation” is promised” (MH 117). We can say that today, as several analysts have pointed out, an idolatry of technology prevails, a true religion. Among us, our world-renowned neuroscientist Miguel Nicolelis, professor in Autin University has publicly denounced this.

It would be lengthy to comment on the various points addressed by the encyclical Magnifica Humanitas. Practically, its scope extends from philosophies of life, through politics (the various radicalisms), economics (financialization and cryptocurrencies), the rescue of the heart, education, the importance of the social imaginary, the issue of work and ecology, culminating in utopias based on digital, technological and cybernetic culture and finally in the civilization of love. This “is not a naive utopia, but a demanding project” (MH 186).

In summary, the intellectual, theological, and spiritual background of the current Pope is evident. He is founded on Saint Augustine (354-430), the inspiration for his Religious Order (Augustinians). As is known, the Bishop of Hippo, one of the geniuses of Western thought, articulates his vision of history in the dialectical interplay between the two cities and the two loves (MH,129-130): the earthly city and the heavenly city, the love of God and neighbor and the love of self. Biblically, this means: building Babel, the prototype of the human being who arrogantly thinks only of himself, forgetting God, and rebuilding Jerusalem, an example of the human being who makes history thinking of God and, from Him, of himself (MH, 130).

Leo XIV updates this dialectic with what is currently happening: a system of surveillance and control over populations, proposed by some digital platforms, especially the most perverse of all, Palantir (to control all the people of a country and use AI for war), and the system of care for the human being, of their respectful relationship with nature and universal fraternity among humans and between them and the Whole. All his reflection presupposes this current confrontation.

 Clearly takes a stand for care, for selfless love, for the perspective of the victims, the poor, and the oppressed. It presents us with a contemporary, highly relevant text, using the language of our time and therefore accessible to all, without sacrificing the gravity and depth of the issues to be considered, addressed, and pursued in a way that generates hope for the possibility of a different world, affectionate, friendly to nature, and open to the Infinite.

In conclusion, we can affirm that the current Pope, following in the footsteps of Saint Augustine and the great doctrinal tradition of the Church on social issues (summarized in the encyclical MH nn. 28-44), re-proposes the theme of the civilization of love (a term coined by Pope Paul VI). He defines it thus: “it consists of translating charity into structures of justice, in giving institutional form to fraternity and considering the other – whether person or people – as a necessary ally for the construction of the common good… Only this love can generate a stable international order, transforming coexistence from a simple armed coexistence into a community of destiny” (MH, 186).

Leonardo Boff,1938, is a Brazilian theologian and belongs to the Earth Charter International Group.