Magnifica Humanitas is the first encyclical letter of Leo XIV. From the outset, the pontifical document has generated considerable debate, especially regarding the issue of so-called artificial intelligence. Yet it would be reductive to read and present this document merely as an intervention on that subject.

Certainly, technology is an important theme, but the true core of the encyclical is, in my view, metaphysical and anthropological. As its title suggests, the Pope focuses on the safeguarding of the human person in an age – our own – in which the danger of «new forms of dehumanization» is always lurking. Consequently, we have «the pressing duty to remain profoundly human […] lovingly safeguard the grandeur of humanity […] the splendor of which no machine can ever replace» [1].

Artificial intelligence, therefore, is one issue among many – not the issue – addressed in the encyclical. Indeed, Leo XIV’s position on AI can only be properly understood when interpreted through the metaphysical and anthropological categories of the philosophia perennis [2]. Bovassi and Vitale aptly observed in a recent article:

«Contemporary human reality – especially in the Western world – is increasingly fragmented by a profound anthropological dichotomy that inevitably extends into the strictly juridical sphere. Today it is deeply intertwined with the technological dimension, which not only reshapes its technical possibilities but also, and above all, its intellectual, cultural, and ultimately relational capacities, thereby requiring an ever-renewed and constant form of critical reflection» [3].

This “lacerating dichotomy” is, above all, a metaphysical rupture that Leo XIV seeks to mend by drawing upon one of Augustine’s best-known images: the two loves and the two cities. According to my reading, this constitutes the fundamental metaphysical category for understanding the document [4], present from the very opening of the encyclical [5] as the light that illuminates the entire text. According to the Pope, this light takes concrete form in two biblical icons: the construction of the Tower of Babel (cf. Gen 11:1-9) and the rebuilding of the walls of Jerusalem (cf. Neh. 2-6).[6]

These two biblical episodes represent the scriptural expression of Augustine’s doctrine of the two loves. They not only describe our inner world – our troubled soul – thus providing an anthropological key, but above all they express a metaphysics of transcendence. According to both the Bishop of Hippo and the Pope, only such a metaphysics can lead human beings beyond the restlessness of their finite condition, allowing the soul to undertake a “gymnasium of desire” within the arena of the world, guided by the principles of the ordo amoris [7].

For Leo XIV, this metaphysical orientation constitutes an indispensable theoretical framework. Without it, human action would become – and in some cases has already become – the prey of nihilistic emptiness and meaninglessness, inevitably leading to the triumph of the law of the strongest [8]. Ultimately, this is precisely what we encounter in the great classics of Western thought. Plato, for example, in his political dialogues repeatedly emphasizes that the absence of metaphysical stability necessarily results in the domination of the instinct of pleonexia (πλεονεξία), that insatiable desire always to possess more, which grows without measure once deprived of the measure provided by love.

From this perspective, the Church’s social doctrine – which the Pope presents in historical and doctrinal outline in Chapters One and Two – constitutes the socio-political expression of the metaphysical reconciliation that Leo seeks to accomplish in continuity with the Church’s tradition. The aim is not to destroy the earthly city by denying its value, but rather to open it toward the heavenly city, thereby overcoming the narrow confines of immanentism where, to paraphrase Cornelio Fabro, finitude devours subjectivity. This is precisely what occurs in the various theories of so-called transhumanism: cognitive enhancement, genetic engineering, life extension, and the hybridization of organism and machine[10], all represent manifestations of the metaphysical failure described above.

Plato had already identified this limitation in what he called the “first navigation” of the natural philosophers, namely, the attempt to seek the arché entirely within the sphere of immanence. Leo XIV simply retrieves this insight and applies it to the anthropological, social, and political challenges of our own age:

«Our relationship with life seems to be in crisis today. Everything that appears as a “limit” – incapacity, illness, old age, suffering, vulnerability – tends to be seen primarily as a defect to be corrected, rather than as a reality through which our humanity matures and opens itself to relationship. And yet we must remember that humanity flourishes not despite limitations, but often through them. The light of faith offers a perspective on reality that helps us recognize what we call the “contingency” of the things of this world. While it is right to strive to alleviate the suffering that marks human life, it is also wise to acknowledge our fundamental finitude» [11].

Giovanni Covino

---

Notes

[1] Leo XIV, Magnifica Humanitas, no. 15.

[2] Philosophia perennis refers to those fundamental philosophical truths accessible to human reason that retain their enduring validity regardless of changing cultural and intellectual trends or particular philosophical systems. Within the Catholic tradition, notable references are found in Humani Generis of Pius XII and Fides et Ratio of John Paul II.

[3] G. Bovassi – A. R. Vitale, Magnifica Humanitas: Bioethical and Philosophical-Juridical Reflections on Leo XIV’s First Encyclical, available at: https://www.centrostudilivatino.it/magnifica-humanitas-notazioni-bioetiche-e-filosofico-giuridiche-sulla-prima-enciclica-di-leone-xiv/.

[4] Cf. Augustine, De Civitate Dei, XIV, 28; cf. Leo XIV, Magnifica Humanitas, nos. 129–130.

[5] «Humanity, created by God in all its grandeur, is today facing a pivotal choice: either to construct a new Tower of Babel or to build the city in which God and humanity dwell together» (no. 1).

[6] Cf. Magnifica Humanitas, nos. 7–10.

[7] Cf. Augustine, Homilies on the First Epistle of John, IV, 6.

[8] «In such a climate, nihilism and pragmatism become intertwined and end up normalizing grave errors. Religious extremism and identity-based fanaticism ally themselves with irrational economic policies, while politics often turns to misinformation and ridiculing opponents, and systematically cultivating fears and resentments» (Leo XIV, Magnifica Humanitas, no. 206).

[9] Cf. Plato, Gorgias, 521e–522a.

[10] On this subject, I refer the reader to the article cited in note 4 and the bibliography discussed therein.

[11] Leo XIV, Magnifica Humanitas, no. 118.