Crossroads Podcast: Is Pope Leo XIV Worried About AI — or something deeper?

Super-intelligent computers that go bad isn’t a new concept, as fans of the “Terminator” franchise know all to well.

However, when I think about digital evil, I remember the haunting voice of the HAL 9000 supercomputer in 1968 sci-fi classic “2001: A Space Odyssey.” Think about this: That was a voice that Sir Anthony Hopkins heard in his head as he prepared to play the brilliant serial killer Hannibal Lecter in “The Silence of the Lambs.”

Hollywood fever dreams are one thing. But those plot lines reflected another reality: Digital futurists have — for decades — voiced concerns about potentially fatal flaws in artificial intelligence. Now, in the first days of his papacy, Pope Leo XIV has added his moral and even theological clout to those discussions.

That brings us to a solid feature at The New York Times — “Top Priority for Pope Leo: Warn the World of the A.I. Threat” — that served as the hook for this week’s “Crossroads” podcast. As I noted in a recent Rational Sheep post, in his first public address to the College of Cardinals, Leo XIV said that his concerns about this subject influenced his choice of a papal name:

… I chose to take the name Leo XIV. There are different reasons for this, but mainly because Pope Leo XIII in his historic Encyclical Rerum Novarum addressed the social question in the context of the first great industrial revolution. In our own day, the Church offers to everyone the treasury of her social teaching in response to another industrial revolution and to developments in the field of artificial intelligence that pose new challenges for the defence of human dignity, justice and labour.

The Times team caught that crucial link, as shown in this background material:

… Pope Leo’s advocacy comes at a time of similar technological disruption — and promise. Companies are spending tens of billions of dollars and working at a breakneck development pace, while there is little global agreement about regulation. Leaders in countries like the United States see advancing A.I. as a geopolitical imperative and fear that any major restrictions could give rivals like China a chance to race ahead.

Yes, the Times team did a fine job of addressing some of the economic implications of the pope’s concerns about AI. In the podcast, I stressed that it will be crucial for editors to add a religion-beat specialist to the reporting team when preparing for future stories about this topic.

Why? Hold that thought. Here is the crucial summary material in the current story:

Less than a week into the role, Leo XIV has publicly highlighted his concerns about the rapidly advancing technology. In his inaugural address to the College of Cardinals, he said the church would address the risks that artificial intelligence poses to “human dignity, justice and labor.” And in his first speech to journalists, he cited the “immense potential” of A.I. while warning that it requires responsibility “to ensure that it can be used for the good of all.”

While it is far too early to say how Pope Leo will use his platform to address these concerns or whether he can have much effect, his focus on artificial intelligence shows he is a church leader who grasps the gravity of this modern issue.

Paolo Benanti, a Franciscan friar, professor and the Vatican’s top adviser on the ethics of artificial intelligence, said he was surprised by Leo’s “bold” priorities. Father Benanti remembers that just 15 years ago, when he told his doctoral advisers that he wanted to study cyborgs and human enhancement at the Gregorian, the pontifical university where he now teaches, his advisers thought he was nuts.

It’s clear that the Vatican’s attitude about AI will change with a mathematician and canon lawyer sitting in the Chair of Saint Peter.

During the podcast, I listed a number of topics that Pope Leo XIV may address in the near future, or in the years ahead, as corporations and governments continue to weave digital technology into the lives of ordinary people.

For example, does anyone remember the blitz of news stories surrounding the issue of churches using AI to power websites dedicated to Christian apologetics? Please see my “On Religion” column about the rise and fall of the “Father Justin” project. Here’s the overture on that:

The penitent crafted the perfect sin to confess to a virtual priest: "Bless me father, for I have sinned. … I have had anger in my heart about the deployment of AI chatbots in inappropriate places."

"Father Justin," a 3D AI character created by the San Diego-based Catholic Answers network, offered biblical advice for wrestling with anger.

"God is merciful and loving, my child," the bot concluded. "For your penance, I ask you to pray the Our Father three times, reflecting on God's infinite mercy and love. And now, I absolve you of your sins in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit."

Legions of cyberspace believers pounced. One tweeted this cry: "HAIEEEEEEE." Susannah Black Roberts of Plough Magazine noted: "Hey @catholiccom, your AI 'priest' is offering absolution. Might want to kill it with fire and never do anything like this again.”

At Rational Sheep, I have written a number of posts with headlines like these:

— “Who is to judge? Concerning the wife with the AI lover — The New York Times offers another window into the evolving world of online love.”

— “OMG, this is way stranger than an AI boyfriend — But don't worry, putting a digital Jesus inside a Confession booth was not what it appeared to be!”

— “Your new "friend" -- You knew this AI device would show up — In the age of Chat sermon helpers, maybe digital priests loom somewhere in the future?”

— “Can AI robots offer advice that heals souls? You know that, soon, there will be more to this trend than lonely teens and the elderly.”

— “Lonely? Some say AI friends would help — This essay at After Babel is must reading for pastors — period.”

Where is this story going? I suggest that tech-beat reporters ask AI professionals about any naging fears about their work. Then religion-beat scribes can ask ethicists, theologians and pastors about their concerns.

I predict that some of the themes, in both lists, will sound something like this chunk of a recent Rational Sheep post: “Life beyond screens: Thinking about an AI apocalypse.” This is a good place to start:

This brings us to an increasingly relevant question: Can a computer lie? That leads directly to another hot-button question: Can a computer sin?

Well, a computer can be programmed — by sinful, fallen human beings — to twist facts or manipulate data to confuse or deceive people. But are these sins committed by the computers or the programmers? …

The ultimate question is whether, at some point, flaws in the programming will merge with some kind of super Artificial Intelligence and the computers will, you know, start working their way through the whole Ten Commandments.

Beyond that, there is the concept that tech lords like to call “The Singularity,” which the Google AI program defined as:

The “singularity” refers to a hypothetical point in the future where technological advancements, particularly in artificial intelligence, become so rapid and transformative that humanity will be irreversibly changed, potentially surpassing its current understanding and control. It's often associated with the development of superintelligence, where machines become smarter than humans and self-improve at an exponential rate.

On the practical side of things, the Vatican is already dealing with this reality — YouTube miscreants using AI programs to create deep-fake videos and audio recordings of Pope Leo XIV saying things he did not, in fact, ever say. Check out this Catholic News Agency story: “Fact check: Did Pope Leo give a 36-minute speech praising the leader of Burkina Faso?”

Also, what are Catholic leaders supposed to do when bishops, on social media, take shots at Vatican decisions and documents and the posts and videos go viral? We already know the answer to that one.

In conclusion, I also recommend that journalists and news consumers check out J.D. Flynn’s recent “Hacked” post at The Pillar. In addition to a helpful summary of moral and cultural questions linked to life in the digital world, there was this recent case study:

… Last month, commenters on reddit.com flagged a different kind of situation involving a bishop’s social media — a Reddit poster noted the case of a U.S. bishop whose official twitter.com account followed only three profiles, two of which seemed dedicated to posting explicit pornography. The reddit post about that was screenshotted and texted to all corners of the Church, judging from the very high number of readers who saw fit to bring it to The Pillar’s attention.

After the posting got some attention, the bishop no longer follows those profiles, with his diocesan spokesman telling The Pillar yesterday that the bishop’s account “was hacked,” and that “he obviously did not, himself, follow the inappropriate accounts.”

Instead, “that was done by whoever gained access to his account,” the spokesman said, adding that the hacker also “blocked the USCCB account and the accounts of Pope Francis and Pope Leo XIV.”

The interloper also apparently prevented the bishop from sending “any posts from his X account in recent weeks,” according to his diocese — although according to The Pillar’s review, the bishop has posted pictures and scriptural excerpts regularly, every few days at least, for the whole of 2025.

Well now. It’s safe to say that we have not heard the end of religious leaders having to deal with AI tricksters and online hackers.

Will Pope Leo XIV keep speaking out on these topics? We can assume so, since the bishop who is now pope noted, at the 2012 Synod on Evangelization:

If the new evangelization is going to counter … mass media-produced distortions of religious and ethical reality successfully, pastors, preachers, teachers and catechists are going to have to become far more informed about the context of evangelizing in a world dominated by mass media.

Now we can add, “in a world dominated by digital media.”

Enjoy the podcast and, please, pass it along to others.