Antiqua et Nova. Note on the Relationship Between Artificial Intelligence and Human Intelligence
Doctrinal note of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith and the Dicastery for Culture and Education, approved by Pope Francis, on the relationship between artificial intelligence and human intelligence. Distinguishes AI from the human intellect (rational, embodied, relational, oriented to truth), then applies that anthropology to AI in society, work, human relationships, healthcare, education, misinformation and deepfakes, privacy and surveillance, and warfare. Its criterion of discernment throughout is whether a given use of AI upholds human dignity and the common good; it calls on developers, operators and regulators to keep responsibility with human decision-makers, but imposes no canonical obligation of its own.
Summary and content fields are drawn from the document text and are pending editorial review.
Who issued it
Who it governs
Not yet recorded.
What the document contains
Content fields have not been written for this record yet.
How it scores
Each score is backed by a quote verified against the document text. Editorial review has not yet confirmed them.
Accountability
4/5Clear responsibility for AI outcomes
Regulatory frameworks should ensure that all legal entities remain accountable for the use of AI and all its consequences, with appropriate safeguards for transparency, privacy, and accountability
par. 46 (following pars. 44-45 on moral responsibility)
screening score · 2026-08-20
Fairness
3/5Non-discrimination and equitable treatment
AI could be used to perpetuate marginalization and discrimination, create new forms of poverty
par. 52
screening score · 2026-08-20
Human Dignity
5/5Respect for the inherent worth of persons
The commitment to ensuring that AI always supports and promotes the supreme value of the dignity of every human being and the fullness of the human vocation serves as a criterion of discernment for developers, owners, operators, and regulators of AI
par. 43, section 'Helping Human Freedom and Decision-Making'
screening score · 2026-08-20
Human Oversight
4/5Humans remain in control of consequential decisions
it is important that ultimate responsibility for decisions made using AI rests with the human decision-makers and that there is accountability for the use of AI at each stage of the decision-making process
par. 44
screening score · 2026-08-20
Privacy
4/5Protection of personal data and private life
making the role of data privacy even more imperative as a safeguard for the dignity and relational nature of the human person
pars. 90-94, section 'AI, Privacy, and Surveillance'; quote from par. 92
screening score · 2026-08-20
Transparency
3/5Openness about how AI systems work and are used
the algorithms that govern it should be trustworthy, secure, robust enough to handle inconsistencies, and transparent in their operation to mitigate biases and unintended side effects
par. 46
screening score · 2026-08-20
Enforcement
2/5Consequences and compliance mechanisms with real force
The risk of surveillance overreach must be monitored by appropriate regulators to ensure transparency and public accountability
par. 93 - addressed to civil regulators; the Note itself creates no compliance mechanism
screening score · 2026-08-20
Impact Assessment
2/5Required assessment of an AI system's risks/impacts before or during use
the ends and the means used in a given application of AI, as well as the overall vision it incorporates, must all be evaluated to ensure they respect human dignity and promote the common good
par. 42 (cf. par. 110); an ethical evaluation duty, not a procedural assessment - 'assess'/'audit' appear 0 times in the text
screening score · 2026-08-20