Pope Leo XIV Addresses AI Concerns and Church Challenges During In-Flight Conference
During a recent in-flight news conference, Pope Leo XIV addressed concerns regarding the rapid development of artificial intelligence, stating he is not in panic mode while still advocating for careful regulation. The pontiff emphasized that a Vatican commission is currently working to ensure AI technology remains aligned with human values and safety. Additionally, the Pope defended the Church's recent stance against euthanasia and assisted suicide in France, characterizing it as a moral duty rather than political interference. He also addressed the ongoing issue of clerical sexual abuse, acknowledging the systemic failures within some Church organizations and the profound harm caused to victims. Throughout the discussion, he underscored the importance of continued dialogue and research in navigating these complex modern challenges.
3 days ago
Pope Leo XIV said he takes warnings about artificial intelligence seriously but is not panicking, and urged continued work to prevent the technology from threatening humanity. During a 23-minute in-flight news conference, he also defended the Church’s comments on euthanasia and discussed sexual abuse within Church institutions. 1
Leo said concerns raised by AI experts should not be dismissed as “fake news” or treated as attempts to gain financial or other benefits. He said he sleeps at night and is not in “panic mode,” while emphasizing that the risks warrant attention. 1
The pope pointed to the Vatican’s AI commission, which he said works to coordinate the Church’s use of the technology and support dialogue and research. Its aim, he said, is to help ensure AI does not reach a point where it destroys humanity; he added that people must keep working rather than assume nothing will happen. 1
His remarks came amid warnings from a former Anthropic safety researcher about the possibility of AI causing human extinction, and a call by Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei for the industry to slow advanced-model development. The article also reported that President Donald Trump had criticized Amodei’s position, arguing that US restrictions could benefit China. 1
Asked whether he had crossed a boundary by opposing France’s legalization of euthanasia and assisted suicide, Leo said he had not: he characterized the Church’s position as applying the Gospel to people’s lives, rather than entering politics. He said the Church’s defense of life includes affirming the meaning and value of life amid illness, disability, or pain. 1
On whether clerical sexual abuse is systemic, Leo said he preferred a different framing. He acknowledged that some Church organizations had at times been abusive “as a system,” while describing sexual abuse first as a human problem that takes on an additional dimension when it occurs within the Church, because it can deeply wound or destroy victims’ faith. 1
He said the Church has been seen as responsible, but can also play an important role in helping victims find healing. 1*
Catholic moral responsibility in governing artificial intelligence risks
Catholic moral responsibility in governing artificial intelligence is not exhausted by asking whether an AI system works. The central questions are whether its purposes and effects respect human dignity and serve the common good, and whether identifiable people remain answerable for decisions made through it. AI is not a moral agent: responsibility belongs to the people and institutions that design, deploy, oversee, regulate, and use it.
Human dignity must be the governing measure. AI should serve people, not treat them merely as data, targets, or instruments of efficiency. Its ends, means, and underlying vision should be assessed for their effects on human dignity and the common good, including in social and economic life.
Responsibility must be traceable throughout the system’s life. The duty begins with developers and producers, continues through those who manage and oversee systems, and also includes users who rely on AI outputs. Delegating a task to a system does not transfer away human accountability. Governance should therefore identify who is responsible at each stage, including when AI contributes to consequential decisions.
Safeguards should make systems worthy of reliance. Where AI assists decision-making, the systems should be trustworthy, secure, robust in handling inconsistencies, and transparent enough to help detect bias and unintended effects. Appropriate protections for privacy and accountability are also important. Those using AI should avoid dependence that displaces their own judgment.
Governance should protect the vulnerable and the common good. Catholic analysis asks who benefits, who bears the risks, and whether AI worsens exclusion or inequality. It also calls for attention to justice, peace, international security, and environmental harm, rather than assessing systems only by efficiency or profit.
Public authority has a distinct role. The Church’s teaching does not reduce responsible governance to voluntary choices by individual companies or users. It recognizes the need for political action and regulatory frameworks that establish conditions for beneficial use and preserve accountability. The precise legal rules will differ by society, but the moral aim is to make human institutions answerable for AI’s effects.
For a proposed AI system or policy, ask:
These questions express a wider Catholic understanding of responsibility as care for others, not merely accounting for outcomes after harm has occurred. As AI’s power increases, the responsibility of individuals and communities must increase with it.