The “Ethics of AI” Dialogue: A Conciliar Sect’s Naturalistic Diversion
The cited article from EWTN News (February 23, 2026) reports on a dialogue in Brussels organized by the Commission of the Bishops’ Conferences of the European Union (COMECE) and European Future Talks. It quotes “Pope Leo XIV” using a tablet and features statements from COMECE adviser Friederike Ladenburger and Professor Philip McDonagh. The core warning is that faith-based voices risk marginalization as AI governance is shaped by “technical, commercial, and regulatory actors” alone. The article promotes ongoing dialogue, references the EU AI Act’s “high-risk” classifications, and aligns the initiative with the Vatican’s “Rome Call for AI Ethics” and the document *Antiqua et Nova*. It frames the ethical challenge in terms of “human dignity,” “democracy,” and “peace,” presenting the conciliar structures as legitimate partners for EU institutions under Article 17 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. The underlying thesis is that the post-conciliar Church must assert its voice in the secular forum to prevent a purely technocratic AI future.
Factual Level: A House Built on Sand
The article’s entire factual framework collapses under the weight of Catholic doctrine before the watershed of 1958. It operates on the false premise that the entities speaking—”Pope Leo XIV,” COMECE, the Dicasteries issuing *Antiqua et Nova*—possess any legitimate teaching authority. From the unchanging perspective of the Church, Robert Prevost, as “Pope Leo XIV,” is a manifest heretic and a public apostate, having been excommunicated *latae sententiae* for his participation in the conciliar sect’s apostasy. As St. Robert Bellarmine definitively taught, a manifest heretic “by that very fact ceases to be Pope and head, just as he ceases to be a Christian and member of the body of the Church” (*De Romano Pontifice*). The 1917 Code of Canon Law, Canon 188.4, confirms that an office becomes vacant “by the mere fact… if the cleric… publicly defects from the Catholic faith.” Therefore, all structures emanating from the Vatican since the death of Pope Pius XII—including COMECE, the Pontifical Academy for Life, and the Dicasteries—are sects occupying Catholic property and titles. Any “dialogue” they engage in is the dialogue of false prophets.
Linguistic Level: The Language of Naturalism Masquerading as Faith
The article’s vocabulary is a telltale sign of its apostasy. It speaks of “human dignity,” “democracy,” “peace,” and “value-based approach” as ultimate goods. This is the language of the Syllabus of Errors, which Pius IX condemned. Error #40 states: “The teaching of the Catholic Church is hostile to the well-being and interests of society.” The article assumes the opposite, seeking common ground with secular powers on the basis of naturalistic humanism. It references “Article 17 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union” as a legitimate avenue for engagement, thereby accepting the secular state’s sovereignty over the spiritual. This is a direct repudiation of Pope Pius XI’s teaching in *Quas Primas*: “The Church… demands for itself… full freedom and independence from secular authority… it cannot depend on anyone’s will.” The conciliar sect, by engaging on the EU’s terms, acknowledges the state’s ultimate authority, thus denying the Social Reign of Christ the King.
Theological Level: The Omission of the Supernatural
The gravest theological failure is the complete silence on the supernatural. The article discusses AI ethics without a single reference to:
- The state of grace and the necessity of sanctifying grace for moral action.
- The Sacraments as the sole source of grace and the only true means of sanctification.
- The Final Judgment and the eternal destinies of souls.
- The absolute primacy of God’s laws over any human legislation.
- The doctrine that all legitimate authority derives from God (Rom 13:1) and must be exercised in subordination to the law of Christ.
This silence is not accidental; it is the hallmark of Modernism condemned by St. Pius X in *Pascendi Dominici gregis* and *Lamentabili sane exitu*. Proposition #58 of *Lamentabili* states: “Truth changes with man, because it develops with him, in him, and through him.” The article’s ethics, based on evolving “human dignity” and “dialogue,” is a living embodiment of this condemned proposition. It reduces faith to a “value” among many in the public square, rather than proclaiming the exclusive right of Christ the King to govern all aspects of life, including technology. Pius XI in *Quas Primas* declared that Christ’s kingdom “encompasses all human nature” and that “there is no power in us that is exempt from this reign.” The article’s entire project is to carve out a “neutral” space for AI ethics where Christ’s reign is not explicitly acknowledged as sovereign, thus committing the error of indifferentism condemned in the *Syllabus* (Errors #15, #16).
Symptomatic Level: The Fruit of the Conciliar Apostasy
This dialogue is not an anomaly; it is the logical fruit of the “abomination of desolation” standing in the holy place. The conciliar sect, beginning with John XXIII, embraced the errors of Modernism. The *Lamentabili sane exitu* condemned propositions that directly correspond to the article’s assumptions:
- Prop. #57: “The Church is an enemy of the progress of natural and theological sciences.” The article assumes the Church must “engage” with progress, implying the pre-conciliar Church was an enemy.
- Prop. #64: “The progress of sciences requires a reform of the concept of Christian doctrine concerning God, creation, Revelation…” The article’s entire premise is that Catholic ethics must be “reformed” to speak the language of AI governance.
- Prop. #65: “Contemporary Catholicism cannot be reconciled with true knowledge without transforming it into a certain dogmaless Christianity…” The dialogue’s focus on “shared values” and “human dignity” devoid of dogmatic content is precisely this “dogmaless Christianity.”
Furthermore, the article’s acceptance of the EU’s legal framework as a neutral ground for dialogue is a direct implementation of the *Syllabus*’s condemned Error #44: “The civil authority may interfere in matters relating to religion, morality and spiritual government…” By seeking to influence the EU AI Act through “dialogue,” COMECE acknowledges the state’s competence in moral legislation, thereby surrendering the Church’s right to define and govern all aspects of Christian life.
Critique of “Clerical” Actors: Guilty of Apostasy
The individuals quoted—Ladenburger, McDonagh, and implicitly “Leo XIV”—are members of the conciliar sect. Their very participation in this dialogue is an act of apostasy. They are not “Catholic leaders” but apostate functionaries of the neo-church. McDonagh’s invocation of “Article 17” is particularly damning. This treaty article facilitates the state’s recognition of the conciliar sect as a “partner,” thereby legitimizing the secular state’s supremacy in public life. This is the exact opposite of the Church’s claim to be a societas perfecta with its own sovereign rights, a doctrine defined by Pope Leo XIII in *Immortale Dei* and *Sapientiae Christianae*. The pre-conciliar Church would have demanded that all AI development be subject to the Social Reign of Christ the King, as defined by Pius XI in *Quas Primas*, and would have condemned any system that did not explicitly subordinate itself to the law of God and the salvation of souls.
The Only Catholic Response: The Social Reign of Christ the King
The integral Catholic faith, prior to the Modernist infiltration, provides the only coherent response to AI. It is not a matter of “ethics” but of subjection. As Pius XI taught, Christ’s kingdom is “not bounded by any limits” and all nations must publicly honor Him. The state’s duty is to “order all relations in the state on the basis of God’s commandments and Christian principles.” Therefore, any AI system must be evaluated not by “human dignity” in the abstract, but by whether it serves to:
- Promote the knowledge and love of God.
- Facilitate the observance of God’s laws (including the Ten Commandments and the precepts of the Church).
- Protect the innocence of children and the sanctity of the family.
- Defend the rights of the true Church and the free exercise of the Catholic faith.
- Prepare souls for eternal salvation.
Any AI that promotes sin (e.g., by facilitating access to impure content, undermining parental authority, or spreading heresy) is an instrument of Satan, regardless of its “efficiency” or “innovation.” The article’s call for “ongoing dialogue” is a demonic distraction from the absolute demand: “Let Christ reign in the mind… in the will… in the heart… in the body” (*Quas Primas*). The conciliar sect, by refusing to make this explicit and exclusive claim, demonstrates that it serves not Christ, but the “prince of this world” (John 12:31).
Conclusion: The Choice Between Christ and Belial
The Brussels dialogue is a calculated operation to keep the “Catholic” voice within the parameters of acceptable secular discourse, thereby neutralizing the prophetic and juridical claims of the true Church. It is a masterpiece of Modernist strategy: appear relevant by abandoning the supernatural, seek influence by accepting the adversary’s framework, and call for “dialogue” where the only legitimate response is non possumus. The unchanging faith teaches that there is no middle ground between the City of God and the City of Man. AI, like all technology, must be a servant of the Social Reign of Christ or it becomes a tyrant serving the forces of Antichrist. The conciliar sect has chosen the latter path, and its “ethical” discussions are merely the incense offered to the idol of a naturalistic, godless world order.
Source:
Will AI marginalize the faithful? Catholics call for ethical oversight (ewtnnews.com)
Date: 23.02.2026