Pope Leo says AI apocalypse risk is a major concern

By Splitfeed EditorialLast updated Sep 26, 2026, 19:17 UTC

On September 24, 2026, Pope Leo publicly identified the risk of an AI-driven apocalypse as a major personal concern, a statement reported by Reuters, CTV News, U.S. News and World Report, and several other outlets on the same day. The reporting connected the Pope's position to a broader moment: heads of major artificial intelligence firms had recently addressed the United Nations Security Council on existential risks posed by the technology, and the Vatican's engagement with these questions now sits alongside that high-profile international conversation.

The significance of the Pope's statement lies partly in timing and partly in institutional weight. The Catholic Church commands the attention of over a billion people worldwide, and a sitting pope placing AI apocalypse risk in the category of major concerns carries a different kind of authority than a corporate executive or a think-tank researcher making the same claim. What remains in genuine dispute is how seriously to take existential AI warnings from any quarter, whether they reflect honest assessment of real danger or serve, as some critics argue, to shift public focus away from near-term harms and regulatory accountability.

The Anti-AI camp has responded with a notable framing: as accounts including CTV News, Joshua McElwee, and Sipirtu pointed out, the Vatican was raising alarms about AI-driven apocalypse risks years before major American firms brought similar language to the UN Security Council. That timeline matters to this camp, since it undercuts any suggestion that corporate concern-signaling led the way. Voices in this camp, such as ownfeed and The PeaceToday, emphasized calls for international cooperation and keeping the technology under human control, while the skeptical minority within that camp suspects some of the alarm from industry is performative. The Pro-AI camp has no published reactions to this story yet; typically, advocates in that camp would be expected to argue that catastrophic risk framing overstates the danger and that the benefits of AI development should not be constrained by speculative worst-case scenarios. The Middle Ground camp, represented here by Jukesgrrl, offered a measured read: the fact that Pope Leo has a dedicated AI adviser at all is itself a constructive sign of serious engagement rather than reflexive dismissal.

The argument will sharpen around what, if anything, the Vatican does next. Any formal Church document, papal encyclical, or joint statement with governments or AI firms would indicate whether this concern translates into institutional pressure for specific regulation or treaty commitments.