Lion-Hearted Courage for the AI Era?

The Pope as a figure in the AI showdown, like in Dan Simmons' Hyperion/Endymion - I truly didn't have that on my 2025 bingo card either. In what follows, I will briefly explain why Pope Leo XIV gives me - a Protestant theologian - considerable courage in the current situation.

Picture: Edgar Beltrán / Wikimedia Commons / CC BY-SA 4.0

His name is Leo, the new Pope. A lion, a strong one, someone who has the courage to stand up to the powerful of this world - that was the immediate hope of many when the new Pope was announced. It's quite understandable that, given the current crises, people yearn for such a figure, even if they don't belong to a/the Catholic church. But perhaps such a name provides rather weak foundation for full-fledged utopias? Nevertheless, the fact that the conclave elected someone to lead the Catholic Church who - at least it seems - has already drawn attention in social media with critical statements against current US immigration policy could be interpreted as a gentle confirmation for optimists. Having researched precisely how Christian faith can serve as a source of resistance against oppressive power structures, I will certainly follow these dynamics with interest. As a Protestant theologian, I have the advantage of being able to react cautiously at first, without having to immediately position myself as a cheerleader - only to explain my disillusionment later. But I don't want to make it quite so comfortable for myself in one respect: I am genuinely impressed by how the new Pope has directly positioned himself on the topic of 'artificial intelligence.'

I have often lamented our lack of discourse on how we as a society want to shape our future in light of AI development - and how frustrating it is that politics is heading full steam toward an AI era without having given any thought to its design. Our current discussions are largely characterized by ignorance of what is technically already feasible and foreseeable. This leads to pseudo-debates - something alert citizens have certainly noticed. We shouldn't be surprised when they get the impression that everything about AI is mere speculation, with transparently insubstantial hype and horror scenarios used to court attention. This is fatal because, within certain parameters, we can already realistically assess what awaits us and we could have fruitful discussions about how to address it.

This is precisely where, in my opinion, theology is also needed. To be sure, AI challenges religious claims even more than has been the case anyway since the Enlightenment. Conversely, the language increasingly employed regarding AI developments demands critical questioning against the backdrop of theological history - a history rich with experience in how concepts like omniscience can be used and misused!

So far, I find the theological contribution to this topic too meager. I don't want to downplay the systematic theological work already done on anthropology - much of it is relevant. I appreciate that theological ethics has already focused early on specific applications of AI, such as in medicine. It also seems entirely appropriate when individuals like ethicist Peter G. Kirchschläger - one of the few theological experts who regularly comments on AI - dedicate themselves specifically to the topic of regulation. But that cannot be the complete picture.

This is already evident in the current article, where, remarkably, Sam Altman is cited as a supporter for Kirchschläger's model of an AI-UN agency. There's a certain irony when comparing the scenario outlined in this article with the image that flickered across TV screens just days later: Sam Altman alongside Donald Trump, who appears in the Gulf states practically as a US representative for AI deals - while in the background, the 'Big Beautiful Bill' is being prepared, which would simply prohibit any AI regulation for the next 10 years. This is almost exactly the timespan that, according to Sam Altman himself, will be needed to create superintelligence, after which these human attempts at interference would become obsolete anyway. This demonstrates, in my view: Any regulation launched with support from people like Altman would be so toothless, at least toward his company, that it wouldn't be worth mentioning. Among other reasons, I am therefore pessimistic about preventing societal misconceptions simply through AI regulation. Politics is too naive for this, and the AI industry too influential.

Against this background, I find it extremely telling how the new Pope himself explains his task with reference to the last bearer of his name:

Pope Leo XIII, with the historic Encyclical Rerum novarum, addressed the social question in the context of the first great industrial revolution ... Today, the Church offers to all her treasure of social teaching in response to another industrial revolution and the developments of artificial intelligence.

What I find truly remarkable about this short quote is that it reveals a realistic view of the future - an unvarnished acknowledgment of changes that are actually emerging - while simultaneously identifying what I consider the appropriate level of response. It doesn't deny that AI will bring profound consequences. Instead, the focus is on offering interpretations for human self-understanding in this time of uncertainty. Whether the Pope will achieve something innovative here or at least plausibly update the mentioned wealth of experience remains to be seen. (Some of what the Pope has said about AI since his election is, admittedly, quite predictable; see, for example, the rather predictable statements here.) But at least the topic is on the agenda, and Pope Leo seems to be taking a perspective that shows a foresight that most political and cultural figures seem to be still lacking. That is indeed encouraging.