Why Peter Thiel Called Pope Leo XIV a “Useful Idiot” Over AI

Peter Thiel’s attack on Pope Leo XIV turned an argument about AI safety into one about geopolitical competition. Thiel says calls for regulation could restrain the United States and its allies while China keeps advancing. Leo has instead urged governments to address risks that extend beyond any one country. Neither position, on its own, establishes what a workable international agreement would look like. 11720

Why Thiel attacked the pope

In a September 24 conversation with Axel Springer CEO Mathias Döpfner in Berlin, Thiel accused Leo of being a “useful idiot for the [Chinese Communist Party].” His reasoning was that China would not heed the pope’s appeal, but Americans might—and Western restraint could therefore help a competitor. The accusation concerned the effect Thiel predicts from AI regulation, not evidence that Leo was acting on China’s behalf. 13

Thiel’s objection was directed at Leo’s May encyclical, Magnifica Humanitas, and his broader call for AI oversight. It was not established as a response specifically to the pope’s Thursday Vatican remarks. Thiel had also criticized Leo’s approach earlier in the summer. 17

What Leo has called for

Leo’s warnings are not a blanket rejection of AI. On September 21, he urged developers to build systems that strengthen peace rather than deepen social divisions, and that serve human dignity. In May, he called for global rules to oversee the industry; Reuters reported that he renewed his warnings at a Vatican meeting on Thursday, September 24. The available reporting does not establish the precise wording of that address or verify the specific Pontifical Academy of Sciences remarks attributed to it. 1720

The concern predates this exchange. Reuters reported that the Vatican had warned about severe AI risks years before major American technology firms raised alarms at the UN Security Council that week. Vatican AI adviser Rev. Paolo Benanti described the issue as one the Holy See was not confronting for the first time. Leo also presented his May encyclical alongside Anthropic co-founder Christopher Olah, a sign of engagement with AI developers rather than simple opposition to the technology. 204518

The governance question behind the clash

Thiel’s argument raises a real problem for national rules: restrictions adopted by some countries may not bind their competitors. Leo’s case for international oversight starts from the opposite problem—risks to dignity and peace are not contained by national borders. Whether governments can agree on safeguards that reduce those risks without creating uneven competitive costs remains unresolved. 11720

Leo is scheduled to take that discussion to UNESCO in Paris on September 25, where the announced program covers AI, education, information integrity and peace. UNESCO describes the occasion as its first papal visit in more than four decades; its announcement does not establish that this is Leo’s first visit to France. The scheduled address is another forum for his argument, not yet evidence that countries have agreed on common rules. 2628