Christy DeSmith
Harvard Staff Writer
Pius XI Medal recognizes outstanding young researcher every two years
/ Read time: 2 minutes
Harvard Staff Writer
Karin Öberg, professor of astronomy and Thomas Dudley Cabot Professor of the Natural Sciences, traveled to Vatican City last month to accept a very special honor. The Pius XI Medal, bestowed to an individual every two years by the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, recognizes promising scientists younger than age 45. The medal was given to Öberg by Pope Leo XIV during a September 24 ceremony.
Öberg, who was appointed senior vice provost for faculty last spring, was honored specifically for her work as an astrochemist.
“I am profoundly honored by receiving the Pius XI Medal and humbled by its recognition of the impact of astrochemistry on our understanding of the universe,” said Öberg, who studies the role of chemistry in planet formation.
Pius XI medalists are selected by the Pontifical Academy of Sciences’ 80 lifetime members, all researchers appointed by current or former popes. Medalists are chosen solely based on scientific merit, with recipients representing a variety of backgrounds and beliefs. Previous awardees include astrophysicist Stephen Hawking (1975) and Harvard astronomer Harlow Shapley (1948).
“The medal also serves as a beautiful symbol of the productive fellowship between the scientific community and the Catholic Church,” Öberg said. “And as a Catholic, it was very meaningful to receive the medal directly from the hands of the Holy Father.”
The Pius XI Medal, first given in 1938, is named for the early 20th-century pope who gave the Pontifical Academy of Sciences its current title and statutes. The academy traces its origins to the early 17th-century Catholic Church and is headquartered in Vatican City.
The advance of artificial intelligence, we are told, is inevitable. Nothing can stop AI chatbots from entering classrooms, nursing homes, workplaces, even bedrooms.
Henry David Thoreau famously went to Walden Pond to live deliberately. But for far longer, he pursued a lesser-known obsession: observing scientifically.
Say political engagement could be increased in a certain society by the introduction of effective artificial intelligence tools — but those living there would have fewer in-person interactions. Should such tools be adopted?