In a letter to Congressional leaders, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) has stepped into the national conversation on artificial intelligence — not with technical advice, but with a moral compass. The June 9 message outlines six core principles for lawmakers as they shape AI policy, reminding us that this powerful technology must remain firmly tethered to human dignity, the common good, and care for the most vulnerable.
“We are not technical experts,” the bishops write, “but pastors entrusted with concern for the life and dignity of the human person.”
Their letter draws deeply from Catholic social teaching, yet it speaks to a universal concern: how to ensure that AI serves humanity, rather than controls or diminishes it.
At the heart of their message is the conviction that AI must supplement, not replace, human moral judgment. Citing Gaudium et Spes, they insist technology must “serve the human person and contribute to the pursuit of greater justice.”
The bishops warn against transhumanist ideals that elevate machines beyond their function — and blur the line between tool and being.
Think of the poor
The bishops also highlight AI’s impact on the poor. Without intentional safeguards, AI could deepen inequality, widen the digital divide, and automate discrimination.
“It will only serve all,” they write, “when it works to assist our poorest and most vulnerable sisters and brothers.”
These concerns echo Antiqua et Nova, a Vatican reflection on tech ethics, which warns that unregulated AI can exacerbate social injustices.
Another key theme is truthfulness. The bishops lament a “growing crisis of truth” in the digital age—a world of deepfakes, misinformation, and algorithmic manipulation. Their call is clear: transparency, human oversight, and democratic accountability are not optional—they’re essential.
On policy, the USCCB urges lawmakers to consider how AI shapes family life, labor, education, and even warfare. AI, they note, can support families — streamlining tasks and improving communication — but must never promote reproductive technologies that objectify human life. Children, too, deserve robust protections from online exploitation, including so-called “virtual child pornography.”
In the economy, they warn that AI’s labor-saving potential must not strip people of meaningful work. “Work is not just a means to survive—it’s a participation in God’s creation,” they write, referencing the Church’s social doctrine. Displacement, data misuse, and algorithmic hiring all demand vigilant oversight.
Other issues
They also touch on AI’s role in healthcare, civic life, and the environment. From medical advances to ecological solutions, AI has promise — but its energy demands, toxic waste, and tendency to amplify bias must be reined in with thoughtful policy.
Perhaps most striking is their warning on autonomous weapons. Technology that removes humans from battlefield decisions “grants war an uncontrollable destructive power,” they write, quoting Fratelli Tutti. Warfare must always remain under human moral authority.
This letter is more than a plea for regulation. It’s a pastoral reflection, offering Congress — and the public — a reminder that every policy about AI is, at its core, a policy about people. And the Church’s perennial mission remains: to uphold the dignity of every person, especially in the face of change.
Pope Leo XIV’s emergence as a moral voice in the age of artificial intelligence signals more than a symbolic gesture — it’s a deliberate echo of the Church’s historic defense of labor and justice. By invoking the legacy of Leo XIII, who confronted the inequities of the Industrial Revolution, Leo XIV frames AI not as a neutral tool, but as a force that must be morally guided. His very name challenges the world to ask not just what AI can do, but what it ought to do.
In this rapidly shifting landscape, where algorithms influence everything from employment to education, Leo XIV stands poised to insist that technology must serve people — not replace them. The Church’s message, through him, is clear: progress is not defined by how smart our machines become, but by how well we protect the dignity of the human person in a digital world.
