When the Catholic Church publishes a papal encyclical about ‘Magnificent Humanity’, a document warning against the Tower of Babel and calling for the patient, collective rebuilding of a just world, as humanists we might pause mid-scroll and think: that’s our argument.
When I, a former Catholic church historian, computer scientist, and leadership professor turned humanist chaplaincy candidate, read about the core value of human dignity in the context of AI, I suspect a common message.
Abstract (stay tuned for publication of full article)
Pope Leo XIV’s first encyclical, Magnifica Humanitas (May 2026), addresses artificial intelligence with unusual directness: it names algorithmic discrimination, surveillance capitalism, autonomous weapons, and technological unemployment as genuine moral crises, and insists that the response must be collective and democratic, it has to be centred on human dignity and the most vulnerable. Its social analysis is largely sound. Its ethical principles — dignity, solidarity, subsidiarity, the common good, the priority of the vulnerable — map closely onto the core commitments of the humanist tradition.
This article takes that convergence seriously. It argues that the encyclical’s strongest claims do not depend on theological foundations to stand — they depend on reason, evidence, and the accumulated moral experience of our species. A humanist rewriting of the document, retaining every substantive argument while replacing every load-bearing theological claim, produces not a curiosity but a genuinely useful and more universally accessible moral framework for AI governance.
The article then turns the exercise into a challenge. If humanists and the Catholic Church arrive at the same practical conclusions about AI — that technology must serve persons, that power must be accountable, that democratic governance is non-negotiable — humanists need to ask honestly whether they are making that case with sufficient urgency and clarity. Drawing on the encyclical’s central parable of Nehemiah’s wall — rebuilt not by a single authority but by all the people together, each tending their own section — the article proposes five concrete priorities for a humanist AI ethics and argues for a more collaborative, coalition-minded approach to the governance challenge ahead.
The conclusion is neither ecumenical capitulation nor sectarian point-scoring. It is an invitation: to take a good argument seriously wherever it appears, to make it better, and to make it louder.
* About this article
This article, and its supporting document, has been created with research and editorial assistance of Claude.AI. It draws on the full humanist rewrite of Magnifica Humanitas (Pope Leo XIV, 15 May 2026), in which all five chapters and the conclusion were reworked to ground the encyclical’s social-ethical analysis in shared human reason and solidarity rather than theological authority. The rewrite retained the document’s analytical framework and core ethical principles while replacing every load-bearing theological claim. The rewrite is available as a tracked-changes Word document (Follow this link for an executive summary of the rewrite).
** About the author
Dr. Thomas Mengel is a trained theologian with a focus on modern religious history and the sociology of religion. He also has graduate degrees in education, history, and computer science. More recently, he retired from his position as professor of interdisciplinary leadership studies (University of New Brunswick, Canada) and volunteers his time as cooperative community developer, and humanist chaplain candidate based in Pouch Cove, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada. More about him and his writings can be found at thomasmengel.com.