(12 February 2025)

The publication of the Note “Antiqua et nova” on the Relationship Between Artificial Intelligence and Human Intelligence by the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith and the Dicastery for Culture and Education[1] represents a crucial milestone in the commitment of the Catholic Church to defining the ethical and anthropological implications arising from the development of artificial intelligence technologies.

The axiological premise on which the Note is based is the non-overlap between the concept of “human intelligence” and that of “artificial intelligence”, which is merely a product or, more precisely, an imitation of the human intelligence[2]. The Document consequently underlines the inappropriateness of using the term “intelligence” to designate tasks that rely on the analysis of quantitative data within an exclusively logical-computational framework because the intelligence has only a human, spiritual, and relational nature.

The anchoring to the values expressed by the Christian philosophical and theological tradition leads to the reaffirmation of the irreplaceability of the human being, even in the face of technologies capable of replicating and reproducing behaviors that only appear human. Hence, the strong condemnation of the growing tendency to anthropomorphize artificial intelligence products, which, beyond constituting a “grave ethical violation”[3], significantly alters relational and educational dynamics, leading people to perceive mere simulations of empathetic responses as real and human[4].

Nevertheless, the ongoing process of AI anthropomorphization, exacerbated by the latest advancements in robotics[5], further fuels the risk of "idolizing" these tools as "superhuman", even though they remain a "pale reflection of humanity"[6], which is created in the image and likeness of God.

From the necessary recognition of AI systems as tools “of the collaboration of man and woman with God in bringing visible creation to perfection”[7] arises the need to ensure the applicability of the principle of human control and responsibility in algorithmic processes. This requires efforts to guarantee, in all cases - even in the use of new forms of generative artificial intelligence[8] - the identification of humans responsible for these processes.

In this regard, the Note incisively addresses one of the main challenges faced by contemporary legal systems: the complex issue of assigning responsibility for potential damages or the distortive and discriminatory effects caused using such tools. Only the design of algorithms that respect human dignity and are dedicated to the pursuit of the common good can partially mitigate these risks and prevent the emergence of technocratic paradigms based on functionalist views of humanity, which menace undermining both its wholeness and, above all, its dignity.

The second part of the Document examines both the enormous positive potential and the serious risks that may arise from the development of such technologies. In particular, the creation of technologies that replace rather than support workers seems to foreshadow the emergence of a “Worker Question 2.0,” a central theme in the Church’s social doctrine since Pope Leo XIII’s Rerum Novarum Encyclical Letter of 1891, whose opening lines appear to retain their relevance even amid the ongoing technological revolution[9]. The Document also expresses significant concern regarding the increasingly widespread use of such technologies in the military sector[10].

Such critical issues, together with the additional risks of discrimination, social marginalization, categorization[11], surveillance, commodification of human beings, amplification of social and economic inequalities and spread of fake news[12]resulting from inadequately designed AI systems, call for a shared commitment from all “entrusted with transmitting the faith”, including pastors and bishops.

The publication of the Note further strengthens this effort, serving as a warning about the urgent need to safeguard the primacy of the human person and their dignity, even in a society increasingly inclined toward a technocratic drift. In this way, the Catholic Church’s contribution to the “algor-ethics”[13] is further solidified thanks to the concrete elaboration of clear guidelines for the implementation of human-centered artificial intelligence technologies that can serve the common good and the integral development of the person and society.

Fabio Balsamo

[1] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Dicastery for Culture and Education, “Antiqua et nova”. Note on the Relationship Between Artificial Intelligence and Human Intelligence, 28 January 2025, available in L’Osservatore Romano, 28 January 2025, and also at the website https://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/it/bollettino/pubblico/2025/01/28/0083.pdf.

[2] Ivi, no. 3.

[3] Ivi, no. 62.

[4] Ivi, no. 61.

[5] About the development of a so-called theomorphic robotics, cf. Vincenzo Pacillo, «Alexa, Dio esiste?». Robotica, intelligenza artificiale e fenomeno religioso: profili giuridici, in Quaderni di diritto e politica ecclesiastica, 1, 2021, pp. 69-84, specialmente pp. 77-80.

[6] Cf. Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Dicastery for Culture and Education, “Antiqua et nova”. Note on the Relationship Between Artificial Intelligence and Human Intelligence, 28 January 2025, cit., no. 105.

[7] Ivi, no. 2.

[8] On the problems posed by the use of generative artificial intelligence tools see Fabio Balsamo, Apps religiose e intelligenza artificiale generativa,in Diritto e Religioni, 2, 2023, pp. 116-133.

[9] Cf. Leo XIII, Encyclical Letter Rerum novarum, 15 May 1891, in Acta Leonis XIII, 11, 1892, pp. 97- 144.

[10] The same concerns were highlighted by Francis, Message from His Holiness Francis for the LVII World Day of Peace, 14 December 2023, in L'Osservatore Romano, 14 December 2023.

[11] Ibidem, where Pope Francis Stigmatizes the possible use of biometric categorization and social credit systems.

[12] About the potential spread of deceptive or misleading religious content see Maria d’Arienzo, Zuckerberg e i nuovi rapporti tra diritto e religioni. A proposito di libertà di coscienza nell’era digitale, in Diritto e Religioni, 1, 2019, pp. 384-396, especially pp. 395-396.

[13] See Pasquale Annicchino, Tra algor-etica e regolazione. Brevi note sul contributo dei gruppi religiosi al dibattito sull’intelligenza artificiale nel contesto europeo, in Quaderni di diritto e politica ecclesiastica, 2, 2020, pp. 341-351. About the peculiar contribution of the Holy See cf. Raffaele Santoro, Santa Sede, algoretica e intelligenza artificiale: dalla Rome Call for AI Ethics al G7, in Diritto e Religioni, 1, 2024, pp. 714-732; Maria Luisa Lo Giacco, Intelligenza artificiale, intelligenza umana, intelligenza spirituale. La Chiesa cattolica e la regolamentazione del ‘cervello meccanico’, in Coscienza e Libertà, 68, 2024, pp. 67-77.