The address listed is in the US, that one might not be official Church thing.

Thanks for the other two sources.

Also "Vatican Ventures": https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/vatican-ventures

https://religionnews.com/2026/05/22/why-anthropic-is-helping-unveil-the-popes-new-encyclical-on-ai/

(I’ve seen in other contexts « partnership » announcements that were pretty much empty words)

(Also same thing in the SV investments).

In paragraph 92 ff, he elaborates on the technocratic paradigma and digital power: “Contemporary man has not been trained to use power well.”

Someone with your academic standing should at least read the Encyclica instead of indulging in guilt by association fallacies.

One might dismiss the belief set of the Ecclesia Catholica per se, but this Pontifex Maximus is well educated and intelligent. And dwelled and executed the duties of a member of the Jesuit order in Latin America.

It doesn’t matter what’s in it. The structure of the relationship – partnership – is what matters. They’ve already legitimised the company (for people for whom the Vatican can still legitimise anything, that is).

Anthropic tried to get on the Pope good side. I don’t think they really succeeded.

(A lot of religious people have ignored the Church Social Doctrine over the years, Anthropic CEO might do just that with the latest encyclical, but this is a serious takedown of inequalities, explicitly calling out gender inequalities (perhaps the first time the word "gender" is used positively in a church teaching.)

It also kind of relegates JP II theology of the body to the dustbin of history)

This text is about far more than just AI, btw.

The document itself reads great.

But so does a lot of scripture.

It's the actions that matter and bringing in Anthropic says much more than the words.

Read these excerpts below and remember to ask: "okay, now prove it."

Edit: there are supposed to be spacers between quotes but they keep getting Markdowned.

- - -

Over the centuries, technological development has significantly improved the living conditions of humanity. At the same time, each phase of progress has also revealed the ambiguity of tools that can cause harm when not oriented toward the good.

- - -

In the past, it was largely up to the State to guide and direct innovation. Today, however, the main drivers of development are private, often transnational, parties that are endowed with resources and the capacity to intervene that surpass those of many Governments.

- - -

If we focus only on contingencies, we risk letting the succession of emergencies dictate the direction of our path.

- - -

Scientific discoveries are talents entrusted to humanity so that they may bear fruit (cf. Mt 25:14-30). Technology has the power to heal, connect, educate and protect our common home; but it can also divide, exclude and generate new forms of injustice.

- - -

Rebuilding today means recognizing that, precisely from the plurality of voices and visions which, even though they sometimes remind us of the confusion caused by the diversity of spoken languages, a bright possibility emerges. Indeed, this is the possibility of building together, of transforming diversity into a resource and of making listening and dialogue the common ground upon which to cultivate justice and fraternity.

- - -

All too often, we place our hope in unlimited “upgrades,” in forms of progress that exacerbate inequalities, and in immediate solutions incapable of healing people’s wounds. As a result, while some pursue the illusion of unlimited self-assertion, many are deprived of basic necessities.

- - -

We should not be intimidated by tensions or differences because they can become creative forces when guided by shared responsibility.

- - -

We cannot condone naïve enthusiasms, nor fuel unfounded fears. Instead, let us establish standards for discernment — the dignity of the human person, the universal destination of goods, the preferential option for the poor, care for our common home and peace — and let us translate these standards into practices such as responsible planning, the assessment of human and social impact, the inclusion of the most vulnerable, the promotion of digital literacy and guiding research and industry toward justice and peace.

As I posted in reply to another thread on the "Magnifica humanitas", I continue to question how any self-described progressives can stay with an institution as oppressive as the Catholic Church.

https://funcrunch.medium.com/progressive-catholics-please-explain-yourselves-1ec9adc4fc67?sk=cdaa9645e434596425093f277467546d