Still, none of these episodes match the (pop-)cultural significance of what happened today one month ago, on 15 May. Pope Leo published his first encyclical, Magnifica Humanitas (“magnificent humanity”). With five chapters, 245 paragraphs and 224 footnotes, it is not exactly light reading but worthy of today's reading recommendation section nonetheless. A theological and political text likely to be studied for decades, it also embodies the strained relationship with the US American government.
Ency-who?
An encyclical (read: en-sick-lickal) is an ethical code written by the head of the Catholic Church. Through encyclicals, popes address Catholics around the world and outline the Church’s position on the important questions of their time.
Because nobody does symbolism quite like the Catholic Church, 15 May 2026 was no accidental publication date.
On 15 May 1891, Pope Leo XIII – the previous Leo – published Rerum Novarum, the encyclical that defined the Church’s teaching on workers’ rights, one of the most influential papal texts ever written. Quadragesimo anno (15 May 1931) confronted industrial capitalism; Mater et Magistra (15 May 1961) expanded Catholic teaching to global inequality and technological change.
In other words, Magnifica Humanitas is carrying forward the Catholic Church's legacy of social commentary.
Subtitled “On safeguarding the human person in the time of artificial intelligence”, Magnifica Humanitas calls for the disarmament of AI. With “disarming”, Leo doesn't mean “rejecting technology, but preventing it from dominating humanity. It means freeing technology from monopolistic control.” Regulation itself is not enough, AI must become “welcoming and accessible” (MH 110).
Although popes are usually absent from encyclical presentations, Leo appeared in person alongside two professors and an unlikely companion from Silicon Valley, Christopher Olah, the co-founder of the AI company Anthropic. Reportedly Olah, an atheist, even helped Leo write the encyclical.
American Pope vs American President
Leo's encyclical denies “that technical power automatically confers the right to govern” (MH 110), calls the United Nations an “essential instrument for promoting a civilisation of love” (MH 226) and praises the “force of international law” (MH 202); positions, much like other political stances, that have put the Vatican on collision course with Washington over the past year.
Known for supporting migrants, Pope Leo grew increasingly outspoken as ICE enforcement intensified, later replacing a Trump-aligned New York cardinal with a migration-focused leader. By 2026, the first American-born pope openly criticised nationalist rhetoric and questioned the logic of “just war” amid civilian suffering in Iran, though without naming Trump directly.
Then things got personal. Trump called Leo “too liberal” and “terrible for foreign policy”, while JD Vance, the administration’s highest-ranking Catholic convert, recommended that “the Pope should be careful when he talks about matters of theology”. Leo responded to Vance's popesplaining that he has “no fear” of the US administration.
The Trump administration aren't the only ones demanding that the pope should stay out of politics. In Germany, conservative politicians have voiced similar frustrations, complaining that churches are turning into “exchangeable NGOs”.
Historically, however, that comparison misses the mark entirely. “The Church was never apolitical,” Andreas Batlogg, an Austrian Jesuit, theologian and author of a biography of Pope Leo, explained. Far from remaining neutral observers, popes have often actively intervened in world affairs. During the Cuban Missile Crisis in October 1962, Pope John XXIII worked behind the scenes as the world stood on the brink of nuclear war. Pope Francis helped bring opposing parties back to the negotiating table in South Sudan. “The Catholic Church is the world’s oldest global player. When it raises its voice on social issues, people do listen. And if the Church does not stand up for certain issues, no one else will.”
So is Pope Leo Europe’s response to the chaos across the Atlantic? An Anti-Trump, as some have called him?
Batlogg is cautious. “Of course, there is an inherent ambivalence in being both a worldly leader and a spiritual leader. To Stalin’s question of how many divisions the Pope has: the Pope has no divisions and no army, but he does have the power of the word.” Cynical as it may sound, the power of the word seems to be the only power that Europe currently has; certainly more than divisions or armies. And perhaps that is the more unsettling question: what happens if moral authority becomes the only authority left?