Pope Leo on the 'AI divide'

Pope Leo recently turned his attention to an artificial intelligence issue that often flies under the public opinion radar: the global AI divide.

While most Americans are focused on AI’s impact on job security, data privacy and physical infrastructure (data centers), the pope reminded people that the rapid development of AI “risks creating new forms of technological dependence, with poorer nations increasingly reliant on wealthier ones.”

“We must remain vigilant in this regard, lest innovation become another vehicle for ideological or economic colonialism,” he told a group of Catholic legislators Aug. 21.

It was a theme the pope explored in his encyclical Magnifica Humanitas earlier this year. He warned of new forms of data colonialism – including resource and data extraction from poorer areas of the world by countries and businesses that have raced ahead in developing AI.

More generally, he has said, poorer populations are marginalized when critical infrastructure (like banking and employment) moves to digital-only platforms that they cannot access.

The pope’s concerns are supported by recent studies. A recent World Bank report said high-income nations today hold about 77 percent of global data center capacity, while low-income countries hold less than 0.1 percent. Another U.N. report said AI tools are being used by roughly 70 percent of people in high-income countries, compared to only 5 percent in poor countries.

On the other hand, some experts have argued that AI could be a lifeline for the global South. Adapting small AI tools to local conditions, they say, can bring improved medical care, education and business practices to millions of people.

But that would require these countries to make significant expenditures to become “AI ready” – by strengthening power grids, establishing networks of reliable internet connectivity, improving digital skills among the population and providing useful local data.

In short, many poor countries lack the resources needed to get on board the AI revolution, let alone fully participate. This increases the risk that they will become passive consumers of foreign technologies instead of active creators.

Sacred objects and the ancient past

I was in New York recently where I was interviewed by producers of "UnXplained," the documentary TV series hosted by William Shatner. They're doing an episode on Lost Knowledge and naturally wanted to talk to me about the Vatican Archives, where more than 1,200 years of history are documented.

Documents and artifacts of ancient history are still occasionally discovered, and that topic is the theme of a new novel that arrived last week. The Ossuary by David E. Landry explores a what-if scenario that involves the theft of a sealed limestone burial box and the attempts to find out -- and to hide -- what it contains.

The author was aided by my non-fiction books about the Vatican. I'm always happy to learn that a novelist has found useful context in my books.

What just happened?

The unexpectedly swift election of the first American pope shocked the world, and it left many observers wondering: What just happened?

Here are a few immediate thoughts about the dynamics of this conclave.

1. In a conclave with 133 participants and fewer than two weeks to dive deeply into their leadership qualities, the process favored cardinals with wide connections and diverse experiences – in particular, pastoral ministry in more than one country or continent, administrative experience across the globe, and a career that includes work in parishes, dioceses, regional organizations and the Vatican.

Cardinal Prevost, now Pope Leo XIV, fit the bill. Born in the United States, he served as a missionary priest and then bishop in Peru (he holds both Peruvian and U.S. passports) and built good relations with the wider Latin American hierarchy. As head of the Augustinians from 2001-2013, he visited some 50 countries where the religious order works. Since 2023, as prefect of the Vatican department that helps select new bishops, he has interacted with church leaders around the globe. At the Vatican, he was also president of the Pontifical Commission for Latin America, so he kept up contacts with that part of the world. He participated in sessions of the Synod of Bishops, another important meeting grounds.

Some of the many cardinals who came from the church’s “periphery” to this conclave may have made wonderful popes. But I think that without these kinds of international connections and ministerial diversity, their election prospects were close to nil.

For the same reason, I believe, a man like Cardinal Pietro Parolin was destined to exit the conclave a cardinal. He is well known and respected as a diplomat and Vatican official, but has almost no pastoral experience. In the wake of Pope Francis, who saw his job as “the world’s parish priest,” that probably disqualified Parolin in the eyes of many electors.

Only a few other cardinals had the kinds of transversal connections and experiences that make one a natural papal candidate in the modern era. Spanish Cardinal Cristobal Lopez Romero, who has worked in Latin America and North Africa, for example. Or Italian Cardinal Pierbattista Pizzaballa, the Latin patriarch of Jerusalem.

2. Religious order candidates are attractive to the cardinal electors, who tend to trust someone who has a deep spiritual formation and has taken vows of poverty, chastity and obedience. This was true of Pope Francis, a Jesuit, who lived humbly and emphasized the church’s attention to the poor. It is likewise true of the new pope, whose Augustinian order has a tradition of prayer, rejection of privilege and service to others.

3. Language counts. Pope Leo is fluent in English, Spanish, Italian, French and Portuguese, and reads German and Latin. That made him an attractive choice as a global communicator and evangelizer. It also meant that over the years and in the run-up to the conclave, he could communicate with most of the other cardinals in their own language.

4. Finally, the brevity of this conclave demonstrates to me that the groundwork for Cardinal Prevost was laid in advance. Four ballots is not enough for a long shot candidate to win a two-thirds majority of the votes needed for election – which means Cardinal Prevost wasn’t really a long shot by the time the cardinals went into the Sistine Chapel. I think his candidacy was discussed even before the cardinals came to Rome, and a quiet lobbying campaign was quickly put into motion.

I don’t mean to suggest, of course, that Cardinal Prevost was campaigning for the papacy. But other cardinals have a perfect right to promote their favorites, and in a conclave with 133 participants, early organization is an important factor. In this case, that probably meant lining up votes from Latin America, the United States and the Roman Curia, and quietly convincing others that Cardinal Prevost would bring continuity with Pope Francis’ evangelizing vision, but without rocking the boat (as Francis sometimes did.)