What if our reliance on artificial intelligence is quietly eroding our desire for real community? 

Writing from her perspective as a Catholic theologian, UB Cohort Alum, and pastoral associate at Sacred Hearts Parish, Dr. Elizabeth Woodard dives into Pope Leo XIV’s recent encyclical, Magnifica Humanitas, to examine the hidden biases of technology and its impact on human dignity. Read her  reflection below to see why she loves the new encyclical, how it promotes Christian unity, and how leaning into our human limitations can actually lead us closer to God and one another.

---

By Dr. Elizabeth Woodard

How does the encyclical impact me as a Catholic?

As a Catholic, I am not surprised to find myself loving Magnifica Humanitas (Magnificent Humanity), promulgated by Pope Leo XIV in May 2026. The pope articulates what I can only call the “creepiness factor” regarding AI. Although he acknowledges that it is a valuable tool, he clearly expresses the dangers of outsourcing our very thinking to non-humans, warning that “humanity can become a victim of its own achievements” (94).  There are many ways this can take a downward turn, but two of them are the perspectives built into AI under the surface, which we often don’t see or consider; and the “simulation of human communication” (100) over real connection.

The sheer speed at which AI can generate answers can draw us into excessive reliance on it, overlooking the fact that the instant response “reflect[s] the cultural assumptions of those who designed and trained [the algorithm]” (100). And while people recognize they are not communicating with another person, the pope recognizes a danger that they may gradually lose the very desire to form genuine human connections” (100) as we become so accustomed to “talking” with the algorithm. 

I consider the way I long for a doom scroll session at the end of a long day. Then I wonder how I ever got along without this daily dopamine hit. Oh yeah, I had relationships, hobbies, aspirations… A screen has much more addictive dopamine than any of these.

So, is it AI (specifically) or screens (in general) the Pope cautions about?

I see them as inseparable. As a mother, I am increasingly aware and afraid of children addicted to artificial simulations of the world, unable to exist in the actual world, like with this simulation of human connection. Just read Jonathan Haidt’s The Anxious Generation for more on this. It absolutely blew my mind. This quote means a lot to me in this regard: “Without careful attention, an educational system lacking in a love for truth may emerge…As knowledge becomes increasingly fragmented, it becomes difficult to grasp reality as a whole, to ask profound questions about meaning, or to develop authentic, critical and creative thought. Many educators already report signs of dehumanization, where people may ‘know many things’ but struggle to find direction in their lives.” (146)

Is the Pope saying anything radically new?

Both yes and no. In many ways, he draws on the wisdom of many previous popes, especially in basing everything he says on the Catholic social doctrine of universal human dignity (that is, we all deserve fair and dignified treatment as image-bearers of God.)

However, while previous popes have focused on universal access to things like food, water, and shelter, Pope Leo focuses on access to truth itself. I hadn’t been able to name this aspect of the “creepiness factor” about AI because I really hadn’t thought too deeply about where all these ready-made answers come from. But here we are: an algorithm decides what I see when I’m doom scrolling, it gives me advice when I need it, it summarizes the webpages it decides are important. But AI only gives the “impression of objectivity” (100). But it is an algorithm designed by humans.

The pope goes so far as to say, the more we outsource our thinking and decision making to AI, “important and sensitive decisions…risk being fully delegated to automated systems that do not know compassion, mercy, forgiveness.” Therefore, it can “give rise to new forms of exclusion.” (102) This has profound implications for the possible dangers to human dignity: “Entrusting an algorithm in practice with the power to select who is worthy or not…is to hand over the task of redefining the boundaries of human possibilities…The exclusion of the vulnerable becomes cloaked in a veneer of neutrality and objectivity, against which it becomes difficult to raise objections.” (103) 

I hadn’t thought of this. Exclusion, especially exclusion disguised as fairness, is really a key component of Christian unity. Humans cannot enter genuine Christian relationship with each other if it is not on a level of mutual respect for the dignity of the other. AI is not a bad tool in and of itself, but it can be used for the evil of disguised bias if only a select few are in charge of what constitutes “truth.”

How does this impact me as a theologian?

During my time as a doctoral student at the Catholic University of America, I became accustomed to hearing phrases such as “the good, the true, and the beautiful” or “wisdom over knowledge” or “faith seeking understanding,” as the basis for how the Christian intellectual tradition aims to follow Christ. Christ: the Logos itself, our “source and our summit.” (Lumen Gentium, 11)

As we each are unrepeatable and irreplaceable pieces of God’s body, we are given the gifts of this world to ultimately direct us to our telos beyond this world. (I might thank St. Augustine for his influence here). But our modern world more commonly treats  “everything that appears as a ‘limit’ — incapacity, illness, old age, suffering, vulnerability…primarily as a defect to be corrected, rather than as a reality through which our humanity matures and opens itself to relationship.” (118) The Christian faith and Pope Leo emphasize that it is actually in the throes of these painful limits “that we can discover a new wisdom, tangibly experience the closeness of others, and encounter the presence of the Lord.” (119) 

This is not new—Christian theology always rests in the belief in grace and divine sanctification through Christ—but AI has given us a new and instantaneous way to try to solve our limitations, uncertainties, and unanswerable questions. It is a true idolatry, in the original sense of the word, to rely more on machines than on God to navigate life’s uncertainties. The Christian theological tradition invites us to look beyond the problems of this life to our ultimate destiny in Christ eternally. And it invites us to look beyond those problems to God as our comfort and sanctifier through those problems. If we are to navigate beyond the problems of this life, what is the source of wisdom we would use to do so? The pope beautifully says, to this, “The Christian faith answers that question by pointing to a fulfillment that does not arise from a technological divinization, but through God’s grace received in Christ.” (126)

How and why is all of this a matter of unity among Christians? 

I see two important considerations:

1.  For the first time, a pope officially apologized for taking so long to condemn slavery. He states: “It was only in the nineteenth century that a formal, absolute and universal condemnation of slavery was clearly articulated, notably under Pope Leo XIII…It is impossible not to feel deep sorrow when contemplating the immense suffering and humiliation endured by so many in stark contrast to their immeasurable dignity as persons infinitely loved by the Lord. For this, in the name of the Church, I sincerely ask for pardon.” (176) 

To model such contrition and to name the importance of racial justice in the name of Christ whose face is borne by all, especially the most oppressed, is at the heart of Christian mission. It’s also at the heart of Christian unity. 

2: Simply put, we’re all in this together. The work of building God’s kingdom on earth, a kingdom marked by truth, connection, and love of God and neighbor—this is work for all Christians. The Gospel compels us to care for each human person, each magnificent human, as precious image-bearers. We don’t make it unless we all make it.