Magnifica humanitas: an anthropological encyclical for the era of artificial intelligence.
Never before have we had access to so much information nor to such powerful tools for communicating, learning and creating. Nor has it been so easy to confuse information with knowledge, speed with wisdom, or digital connection with authentic human encounter. In the midst of this reality, artificial intelligence emerges as one of the most influential phenomena of our time, awakening enthusiasm, uncertainty and no few questions about the future of humanity. We transit daily between WhatsApp, conversational assistants, image generators and platforms capable of transforming our digital experience in a matter of seconds.
These reflections were present during the dialogue panel promoted by the collective Latin American Theology – Return to the Gospel, a space of encounter between psychology, theology and pastoral action to deepen in Magnifica humanitas, the first encyclical of Pope Leo XIV. At first glance, one might think it is a document dedicated to artificial intelligence. However, as the conversation and shared reflection progressed, a much deeper conviction emerged: the encyclical does not have technology as its protagonist, but the human person.
Listening to how Magnifica humanitas transcends the technological debate to situate itself in the anthropological realm left many of the attendees with a sense of hope. Certainly, the encyclical does not limit itself to AI. The encyclical invites us to look beyond algorithms and to ask ourselves about the meaning of our coexistence, the quality of our relationships, and the place that the person occupies in a society increasingly mediated by digital systems.
In a culture that privileges immediacy, productivity and performance, Leo XIV proposes to place human dignity and the human person back at the center. In other words, it reminds us that the main challenge of artificial intelligence is not technological, but profoundly human. Constant scrolling runs the risk of silencing reflection and feeding a culture of immediacy.
What does it mean to be human when machines seem to think increasingly? Perhaps that is the fundamental question of Magnifica Humanitas. Not how to make machines more intelligent, but how to avoid becoming human beings less reflective, less solidary and less capable of recognizing the dignity of the other.
When the algorithm claims to replace discernment
One of the most significant contributions pointed out by the panelists consists in remembering that technology cannot assume the moral responsibility of our decisions. Where the machine calculates, the person discerns; where the algorithm processes data, the human being is called to interpret, evaluate and decide. That is a central point of the encyclical: what distinguishes us from technology is not the information we possess, but our capacity to discern, act and assume moral responsibility.
From a psychology perspective, this assertion acquires special relevance in a context marked by the so-called cognitive war. Every day millions of people interact with digital platforms designed to capture their attention, shape consumption habits and influence the way they perceive reality. Algorithms are not neutral. They select content, prioritize certain messages and construct personalized information environments that often end up reinforcing prejudices, polarizations or partial visions of the world.
Remaining awake to digital dynamics has become an ethical necessity. The constant displacement of content, infinite scrolling and the permanent search for immediate stimuli can generate a culture of immediacy where deep reflection loses ground to impulsive reaction. We run the risk of becoming accustomed to quick answers to questions that demand discernment, dialogue and time.
A culture of immediacy has been normalized that usually comes accompanied by growing dissatisfaction, by less tolerance toward those who think differently and, in many cases, by feelings of isolation and loneliness.
Freedom, conscience and responsibility continue to be irrenunciable dimensions of the human condition. The encyclical reminds us that speed should never replace discernment.
Between Babel and Jerusalem: two projects of humanity
Among the interventions of the panel emerged a particularly suggestive theological vision: the tension between Babel and Jerusalem. Two distinct ways of understanding social life. Babel represents the permanent temptation to build unlimited power, to concentrate wealth, knowledge and influence in few hands. It is the logic of accumulation, of excessive competition and the pursuit of profit as the supreme criterion for evaluating success.
Seen from this perspective, Babel can manifest itself today in economic and technological structures that privilege growth above human dignity. The concentration of power in large global corporations, the commodification of information and the subordination of the person to market interests constitute contemporary expressions of a logic that runs the risk of forgetting that all innovation must be at the service of the common good. The problem is not technology in itself, but a development disconnected from ethical and social considerations.
Against this vision appears Jerusalem as a symbol of humanity reconciled, capable of building community, subsidiarity and encounter. Jerusalem represents the conviction that the value of a society cannot be measured solely by its economic indicators or its levels of productivity, but by its capacity to protect the dignity of persons, especially those who find themselves in conditions of greater vulnerability.
Magnifica humanitas is inserted in a long tradition of Christian social thought. From Rerum novarum to Laborem Exercens, through Laudato Si, Fratelli Tutti and other recent documents of the magisterium, human dignity constitutes the ethical criterion that allows us to evaluate any form of progress.
In the panel, an idea that was embraced was that the encyclical can be read as a contemporary updating of the Church’s Social Doctrine because it places back at the center an essential question: are we building structures that favor encounter and solidarity, or are we feeding dynamics that deepen exclusion and the concentration of power?
The answer to this question proves decisive for our time. The true discussion is not found between being for or against artificial intelligence. The fundamental debate consists in deciding whether we want a civilization inspired by the logic of Babel or a humanity capable of walking toward Jerusalem.
The preferential option for the poor in the digital age
In the panel, one of the deepest calls of the Gospel and the Church’s social tradition was recalled: the preferential option for the poor. It is not merely a pastoral category or an assistance concern. It is a way of looking at reality from those who experience most intensely the consequences of structural inequalities. Also in the digital realm, the fundamental question remains: who is left out and what are the barriers that prevent them from fully participating in the benefits of development.
While a large part of public debate concentrates on advances in artificial intelligence, millions of people continue facing elementary difficulties in accessing educational, labor and technological opportunities.
In fact, there are entire communities where access to the internet is limited, families that do not have appropriate devices and people who must choose between meeting basic needs or paying for the connectivity necessary to fully participate in digital life. The technological divide is also a social divide. Despite the scientific and economic advances achieved in recent decades, millions of people continue living in conditions of exclusion, marginalization and vulnerability. Economic growth does not always translate into social justice, just as access to new technologies does not guarantee a more equitable distribution of opportunities.
In border cities in northern Mexico, many young people live under the requirement to compete in an increasingly globalized and digitalized economy. However, their economic, family or migratory reality prevents them from accessing the same educational, technological or mobility opportunities that other young people have at their fingertips.
The words of the father of liberation theology, Gustavo Gutiérrez, retain here extraordinary relevance: one must see one’s neighbor. Look at the concrete faces of those who live the consequences of exclusion. Artificial intelligence can open new possibilities for humanity, but it will hardly contribute to building a more just society if it remains indifferent to those who continue to be discarded for economic, social or cultural reasons.
Therefore, Magnifica humanitas invites us to recover the dynamic of seeing, judging and acting. See reality without makeup or technological triumphalism. Judge in the light of human dignity and the Gospel. And act so that progress is not the privilege of a few, but a shared opportunity.
Acting as the Samaritan in times of algorithms
At this point, perhaps the most important question is no longer what Magnifica humanitas says, but what we are going to do with it. As has happened with other fundamental documents of the social magisterium, there is a risk that its pages be widely commented on, cited in conferences or shared on social networks, but the risk is that its message fails to transform the daily life of Christian communities. It needs the commitment of pastors, pastoral agents, communities and committed lay people.
The true test of this encyclical begins after its reading.
· How to make land with Magnifica Humanitas in each of our dioceses? How can we ensure that its reflections reach parishes, youth groups, training spaces, catechesis and ordinary pastoral action?
· How to turn its approaches into concrete experiences of encounter, discernment and commitment to human dignity?
· How to transition it to a pastoral plan?
The encyclical possesses the potential to become a privileged tool for dialogue with new generations. Young people naturally inhabit digital environments, coexist daily with algorithms and face challenges that no previous generation knew to the same extent. Precisely for this reason they need spaces where they can reflect critically on the use of technology, strengthen their capacity for discernment and discover that faith still has something meaningful to say in response to contemporary questions.
· How can we make the encyclical part of the algorithm?
Parishes, movements, congregations, dioceses, episcopal conferences and pastoral organizations are invited to promote formation processes that allow understanding the ethical, social and cultural challenges associated with artificial intelligence. Not to feed fears or sterile resistance, but to form communities capable of dialoguing with the world from a deep humanistic and evangelical conviction.
The panel could not be understood without bringing to the encounter the pontificate of Pope Francis, the need to think of an authentic revolution of tenderness. In the face of polarization, isolation and a culture of waste, the Christian response continues to be encounter. In the face of the logic of permanent confrontation, openness to dialogue. In the face of indifference, solidarity. In the face of individualism, the building of the common good.
To act as the Samaritan, from a pastoral perspective. The encyclical is a call to pause before the other, recognize their dignity and make ourselves responsible for their suffering. To build bridges instead of walls.
We cannot speak of peace without justice, as Leo XIV himself reminds us. It is worthwhile to bring his words to reflection: “There are situations in which, to remain human, we must abandon hesitations and take a side. There are conflicts in which it is not just to remain neutral and it is not enough to think of not being complicit”.
Magnifica humanitas is an invitation to rediscover the best of our humanity. While algorithms learn to know our tastes, habits and behaviors, the challenge of the Gospel remains the same as always: to learn to look at one’s neighbor. To act as the Samaritan in times of algorithms means precisely that: to place the human person and their dignity back at the center of Christian life.
Perhaps the greatest challenge of Magnifica humanitas is not to understand it, but to embody it. Let it cease to be a document commented on in forums and become a daily practice in parishes, communities, movements and families. Let it move from paper to heart, from reflection to action and from theory to encounter. In other words, let it reach the DNA of the Church.
As a teacher, I see daily the challenge of forming people capable of using technology without renouncing critical thinking, discernment and ethical responsibility. Perhaps that is one of the most urgent tasks of our time: to educate for humanity in an era dominated by algorithms.
Because, in the end, the true challenge of our time does not consist in building more human machines, but in preventing human beings from ceasing to be human.
The reflections shared by the panelists made it possible to open new horizons of understanding about an encyclical that, rather than speaking of artificial intelligence, invites us to rediscover the dignity of the human person.
Our gratitude to the members of the collective Latin American Theology – Return to the Gospel for making this space for reflection on Magnifica Humanitas possible and, especially, to Psychologist Liliana Vázquez Roa, to Rev. José Carlos Chávez Arias, to Rev. José Manuel Guerrero Noyola, to Dr. Emilio Salas Guadian, Rafael Sandoval and to Carlos Alberto Lozano Díaz for their valuable contributions during the live panel, which enriched the dialogue and helped convey the humanistic message of the encyclical.
José Martín González Amaro
University Professor
Religión Digital