Pope Leo XIV has taken a stance in the AI conflict sweeping Washington: He's supporting Team Anthropic.
No, Leo is not commenting on theTrump administration’s ongoing battlewith the frontier AI lab and no, he is not donating to itsuper PAC of choice. But on Monday when he revealed Magnifica Humanitas, hisfirst encyclical letter, on "safeguarding the human person in the age of artificial intelligence," it was hard to overlook the fact that Christopher Olah, co-founder of Anthropic, was present at the Vatican to essentially approve of the initiative.
Anthropic has attempted to present its "AI safety" strategy as a balanced position between AI accelerationists who advocate for minimal restrictions and doomers who wish to halt AI progress entirely. Leo's document, which exceeds 35,000 words, echoed a comparable perspective.
Technology is never impartial, as it adopts the traits of those who create, fund, regulate, and utilize it," Leo states at the beginning. "Thus, the main decision is not between 'yes' or 'no' to technology, but rather between building Babel or restoring Jerusalem; between a force that claims to rule the skies and a community that collaborates in God's presence to restore the walls of brotherly unity.
The warning from the leader of 1.3 billion Catholics worldwide regarding unrestricted AI carries substantial moral influence. It also includes a common truth that can be readily applied to American politics: Nothing, and no one, remains impartial.
As soon as Leo stated that this sensitive topic would be the focus of his first major letter as pope, he was diving into the turbulent waters of AI politics in the United States. The encyclical represents the most prominent example to date of agrowing trend of faith leadersSpeaking out against unregulated AI progress. For politicians, activists, and tech experts who have based much of their arguments on their own religious beliefs, the pope's involvement in this conversation has created a clear split — an opportunity for some, a challenge for others.
Several individuals within the industry have embraced the discussion, viewing it as essential for the ongoing success of their products and businesses.
The shared aspect among all religions is the foundation of humanity first," stated Brad Smith, Microsoft's vice chair and president. "In contrast, individuals in the technology industry tend to begin from a different perspective. They start with the technology they are developing, and then consider its effects on people afterward.
However, many in Silicon Valley — including some who are religious themselves — take issue with the pope's message.
I believe it's a rather weak document," stated Dean Ball, a senior fellow at the Foundation for American Innovation and a former AI policy advisor in the Trump administration. "[It] essentially functions as a strongly anti-American statement supporting technocratic control over artificial intelligence; that's simply not what I expected from the Church.
Conservative figures in Big Tech have often reacted strongly against efforts to limit the expansion of AI, with some claiming that rapid development is the optimal way to honor divine purposes. Earlier this year, billionaire Peter Thiel gave a set of contentious speeches in Rome, during whichhe is said to have proposed that the antichrist is probably a luddite-like characterWho seeks to slow down or halt advancement. In response, Friar Paolo Benanti, a consultant for the Vatican regarding AI, authored an article in the French publication Le Grand Continent, titled in English: "The American Heresy: Should We Burn Peter Thiel?"
Among individuals of religious belief who have deep connections to Silicon Valley, no one may encounter a more complex challenge in addressing Leo's encyclical than Vice President JD Vance.
The nation's top Catholic official, Vance is certainly aware of increasing skepticism towards AI within the religious right. At the same time, he has supported President Donald Trump's non-interventionist stance on AI and is alongtime Thiel ally. In the days before the encyclical was released, the vice president was beingpressed by journalists during a White House press conference, and he anticipated that he would agree with certain aspects of it and disagree with others.
Critics of Vance remain doubtful about his ability to manage the conflicting political pressures.
"I believe there's this impossibility that JD Vance is attempting—trying to win over the Silicon Valley conservatives who brought him into the scene while also maintaining the support of the Catholic conservatives who want to take him to the presidency," said Christopher Hale, who writes Letters from Leo, a left-leaning publication.Substack content focusing on the pope and U.S. politicsHe is juggling too many tasks at once.
A representative from Vance chose not to provide a statement for this article.
Besides how Vance deals with the encyclical, Leo's advice is expected to resonate in sermons throughout the United States, further highlighting AI as a political topic. This is especially relevant in a nation where 20 percent of the population is Catholic, and the Church is facing conflicts with some of America's leading politicians, policy makers, and corporations.
Pope Leo XIV has recently introduced a moral framework for the development of future technology according to his vision. Now, discussions will arise regarding the true implications of this framework and the role the Church should play in shaping our collective future.
When the encyclical was releasedOn Monday morning, swift criticism emerged from certain sectors of Silicon Valley — including various attacks targeting the Vatican, Anthropic, the partnership between the two entities, and a vague sense of governmental expansion.
The small group of Bay Area 'Effective Altruists' associated with Anthropic are more energetic in their moral and theological reflections than the entire Catholic Church,wrote Marko Jukic, a senior analyst at the research firm Bismarck Analysis, on X. “The Pope is mimicking their concepts instead of the other way around.”
David Sacks, the former head of AI at the White House whocontinues to have a major impactRegarding the administration's AI policy, he was more courteous, although he alsoquickly pushed back— implying the pope aimed to "grant governments extensive control over AI development under the guise of safety," ultimately resulting in an Orwellian surveillance society.
Asked to explain why Olah chose to interact with the Vatican, Anthropic referenced its initiatives toexpand the discussion on artificial intelligenceby conducting a series of meetings with religious leaders, academics, and moral philosophers from various religious communities.
A significant portion of the technology sector that supports the White House views Leo's message as a purely political strike against their objectives.
I'll remember the people wrapping their arms around this document and the Church right now who aren't Catholic," said Ball, who mentioned to Magazine that he is a Christian and believes in God but doesn't attend church regularly. "It's not really a religious document. It's a highly political one. Essentially, it's about European technocratic regulation and why that's beneficial. ... The world will forget about this document in 24 hours, or at least we will in America.
Equally dismissive was Michelle Stephens, who leads the ACTS 17 Collective, a nonprofit based in the Bay Area that advocates for "Acknowledging Christ in Technology and Society." Stephens considers Thiel a friend; in 2023, he delivered a lecture with Christian themes at the 40th anniversary celebration for her husband Trae, who is a co-founder and executive chairman of the defense technology company Anduril.
Stephens mentioned that she and her team were contacted regarding involvement in the encyclical but had no interest in participating.
I don't think anyone is really keeping track of it," she mentioned in the days before the document was made public. "If anything, it seems like the Vatican wants to take a stance on AI. And I believe Silicon Valley's view is, 'How can you even determine what AI is, to have a position on it?'
She also dismissed worries regarding the creation of a "machine God."
It's completely insane, because if we create any kind of machine, that's constructing a human invention," Stephens said. "We have faith in God and what God is capable of, and there's no way this can't be in line with that.
Other Christians are not entirely convinced. The typical response from the Vatican is that even those of us who are not developing any real technology have an interest in how it will shape the future for everyone — and that there is a moral framework that can be used for technology.
And the idea that the encyclical will be a one-day event might also turn out to be optimistic speculation.
An increasing number of individuals associated with the religious right advocate for the federal government to implement stronger protections regarding AI. They emphasize that the pope's encyclical marks just the start of a discussion that may shape the future of both the Republican Party and the nation.
The concerning aspect is, I believe, quite straightforward: when you create or engineer something that appears to have consciousness, it is inherently godlike," said Michael Toscano, a senior fellow at the Institute for Family Studies, a socially conservative nonprofit organization. "And honestly, the use of Christian teachings by some on the tech right has also sparked interest in an opposing perspective.
Toscano, who is a Catholic, states that the encyclical will act as a foundation for ongoing discussions and promotion regarding the topic of artificial intelligence in Washington.
Mark Beall, a Catholic and the head of the nonpartisan AI Policy Network, pointed out that the Catholic Church and the U.S. government have significantly different roles in today's society. However, he mentioned that the encyclical can serve as a basis for dialogue.
I believe the religious right, in particular, is an essential perspective that should be considered when developing AI policies," Beall stated. "I think it will assist government leaders in mitigating some of the most negative consequences that might arise from AI development if it were solely driven by the unregulated accelerationist movement, which lacks the same philosophical foundation rooted in Western moral traditions.
Beall, who recently penned a lettersubmitted to Congress, backed by numerous former military personnel and AI safety experts, calling for careful consideration in the deployment of AI on the battlefield, is among the most impactful conservatives in Washington regarding technology policy.
The discussion surrounding the encyclical is also taking place in policy discussions. Last week, Trump was close to signing an executive order that would have increased the government's influence over AI systems but changed his mind at the last minute.after learning about worries from Sacks, among others. It marked a win for the accelerationists and a loss for those on the right advocating for increased protections. Nevertheless, there are indications that not all within the administration are eager to keep major policy choices in Sacks' hands.
As a leading contenderFor the 2028 Republican presidential nomination, there was inevitably going to be significant attention on Vance's position regarding AI. However, his connections to both Silicon Valley and the Catholic Church have only increased the pressure on how he navigates this topic.
It seems Vance's approach might be changing. After viewing the Anthropic model Mythos, which has not yet been released because of security issues, Vancesupposedly shared with a gathering of AI executives on acalled last month that it frightened him, and that they had to "collaborate" on the most effective path ahead for the sector.
That's a significantly different message compared to a year prior, when he stated in a pivotal speech in Paris that "we believe that overregulation of the AI industry could stifle a transformative sector as it begins to gain momentum."
Vance also strongly backed the pope's message during an interview with NBC on Tuesday,saying he was glad Leo issued the encyclical.
"What I have read about it seems deeply meaningful, and the kind of content one would anticipate and desire from a leader of the Church," he stated.
The feedback was somewhat more favorable compared to his previous statements to the media before the encyclical came out, where he mentioned, "I'm certain it will have many valuable ideas, some of which I might agree with, and others I might not. However, I believe it will be a very significant document."
Some critics of Vance were unimpressed by his early actions.
[Vance's] response was an attempt to protect himself, I believe, from the more intense aspects of this document," said Stephen Schneck, a Catholic activist who previously chaired the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom and is a political supporter of former President Joe Biden. "He took actions to try to shield himself from it, and he's already selecting which parts of the document he will acknowledge and which he will set aside.
The encyclical will boost Leo's speeches for a year," said Hale. "JD Vance's vision is likely of Leo XIV issuing an encyclical about abortion, but that's not going to happen. That's the harsh truth: The pope is focusing on topics they disagree with.
How Vance connects his ties to the larger Christian right, the tech right, and those who navigate between these groups will be essential as the 2028 presidential primary campaign nears. Both the pope's statement and the concern regarding the proposed executive order have sparked another wave of conflict between these influential groups that Vance is trying to balance.
One of the challenges for Vance and others is that the encyclical doesn't consistently align with a single political ideology.
It is a document that should appeal to both the religious right and the religious left," said Anna Rowlands, a British theologian and academic who addressed the encyclical presentation invited by the Vatican. "I believe the individuals who will be disappointed by it are those seeking unlimited profit growth and competition. Similarly, those who are extremely negative about the current technological landscape may find it overly optimistic.
Jon Stokes, a co-founder of an AI and media company, who also pursued studies in early Christian history and apocalyptic literature at Harvard Divinity School and the University of Chicago, believes the challenge for Vance is more related to the president than the pope.
"He's likely more restricted by the Trump administration's complicated stance on AI [compared to the Church's]," he stated. Indeed, Stokes contended that both the pope and Thiel are worried about how AI might result in even greater concentration of power—and Vance's answer to the question of centralization will be crucial.
It could be challenging for him to associate with the Church due to his position in government.
"I believe that if he becomes overly associated with the Catholic Church's attire, he may risk distancing a segment of the voters he'll need for his political goals," Schneck stated.
At the same time, while some conservatives in Silicon Valley avoid the pope, more individuals working in technology are identifying as religious conservatives and are concerned about the impact of what they and their peers are creating — and are advocating for protections on their own.
I speak with many Catholics who are employed in Silicon Valley, and they are quite worried. I mean, they are very optimistic about this technology, but they are also concerned about how it is being misused," stated Paul Scherz, a professor at the University of Notre Dame whose research examines the relationship between theology and technology. "They have witnessed how social media has been misused. They observe how AI is being applied in potentially troubling ways in warfare and other fields.
For every line that has been drawnin the desert, the political landscape surrounding AI is significantly more intricate and constantly changing than it seems. Nowhere is this more evident than in Anthropic's position among the leading entities.
In Silicon Valley, as the creator of Claude and Mythos, it's currently the most talked-about AI laboratory in the industry.
At the Vatican, Olah advocated for supervision by political and religious organizations that are not focused on the profit-driven nature of AI companies. "If we want this technology to succeed, it is extremely important that there are individuals outside those interests—people who care about things proceeding properly and demand safety, who are closely watching, who are ready to speak difficult truths, who are willing to be our sincere and thoughtful critics," he stated.
And within the White House, the lab emerges almost immediately as both an adversary and a supporter. On one side, the Pentagon hasdesignated the company as a supply chain threat; on the other hand, Trump almost signed an executive order that would essentiallysupport Anthropic's favored policy result.
In the meantime, the company has been taking proactive steps in various ways, challenging the administration in court while also seeking to build goodwill with religious and business leaders across the nation.listening events in Washington and San Franciscoon the future and ethical implications of artificial intelligence.
Some technology doubters view this initiative as part of a larger, dismissive public relations plan.
"I believe that Anthropic's use of a Catholic encyclical in the lead-up to its IPO indicates that our civilization's supporting institutions are declining. You essentially have an AI company leveraging the moral authority of the church to create positive public relations," said musician and professor David Lowery.wrote on XAlthough you may criticize Worldcom and Enron, their actions were limited to corrupting public markets and stealing funds.
However, numerous individuals who have taken part in the sessions have become captivated.
My experience with Chris [Olah] through personal correspondence and discussions, as well as two gatherings I participated in, is that although he identifies as an atheist, he approaches these beliefs with great seriousness," said Charles Camosy, an associate professor of theological and social ethics at Fordham University and a Catholic religious leader. "He takes them so seriously that I believe it's accurate to say he is different from any atheist I have ever encountered.
And according to Camosy's account, this makes him a natural intellectual companion to Leo. Olah is a technologist who reflects deeply on religion. Leo is a religious figure who contemplates technology with great depth.
The reason Cardinal Robert Prevost selected the name Pope Leo XIV, Camosy pointed out, was toecho Leo XIII, who authored a significant encyclical advocating for workers' rights during the Industrial Revolution; the current Leo is focused on the AI revolution. Smith, Microsoft's vice chairman, mentioned that he was the first business leader to meet with Leo following his elevation, and he continues to have a robust connection with the Vatican.
For Camosy, the discussion on AI presents the opportunity for the Church to exert a wider influence on society.
I truly believe this offers a moment, a fresh one, for religious discussion in public," he stated. "It's remarkable that Leo is being taken so seriously on this issue even while he is being so theological. It's not diluted, recycled nonsense. It is profoundly, profoundly theological.
No comments:
Post a Comment