VaticanNews portal reports on a conference titled “Preserving Human Voices and Faces,” held on May 21, 2026, at the Pontifical Urbaniana University in Rome, organized by the Dicastery for Communication under the auspices of the conciliar sect. The event, inspired by the message of antipope Leo XIV for the World Day of Social Communications and timed just before the publication of his first encyclical Magnifica humanitas, gathered academics, tech experts, and journalists to discuss artificial intelligence’s impact on human relationships, media, and social inequalities. Speakers included Paolo Ruffini, Cardinal José Tolentino de Mendonça, Marijana Grbeša Zenzerović, Eli Pariser, Kashmir Hill, Vineet Khosla, Paola Ricaurte Quijano, Benjamin Rosman, and Joy Buolamwini. Their reflections centered on AI’s dangers—disinformation, dehumanization, algorithmic bias—and proposed solutions rooted in education, responsibility, and cooperation, all framed within a humanistic vision that conspicuously omits supernatural truth, divine law, and the Kingship of Christ.
The Illusion of “Preservation” Without the Author of Humanity
The very theme—“Preserving Human Voices and Faces”—reveals the theological bankruptcy of the post-conciliar apparatus. To “preserve” humanity while denying its Creator is not stewardship but idolatry. As Pope Pius XI declared in Quas Primas, “the hope of lasting peace will not yet shine upon nations as long as individuals and states renounce and do not wish to recognize the reign of our Savior.” The conference’s entire framework assumes that man can safeguard his dignity, truth, and community through human effort alone—through algorithms, policies, and dialogues—while remaining silent on the only true foundation: extra Ecclesiam nulla salus (outside the Church there is no salvation).
Cardinal Tolentino de Mendonça proclaimed that “human beings can never be reduced to a statistic, a profile, or an algorithm,” affirming man as “a mystery, a call.” Yet this vague humanism lacks any reference to the supernatural end of man, the necessity of sanctifying grace, or the reality of original sin. It is the language of Vatican II’s Gaudium et Spes, which reduced the Church’s mission to solidarity with the world rather than its conversion. True preservation requires not technological ethics but the restoration of the Social Kingship of Christ, for “when God and Jesus Christ… were removed from laws and states… the foundations of that authority were destroyed” (Quas Primas).
Technocratic Pastoral Care in a Church of Apostasy
The conference’s structure—panels on journalism, social inequality, AI ethics—mirrors the conciliar obsession with temporal affairs at the expense of eternal truths. Paolo Ruffini warned against “passively accepting the idea that knowledge no longer belongs to us,” yet he never once affirmed that all truth belongs to God, that reason itself is subordinate to revelation, or that the Church alone is the custodian of divine knowledge. His concern is purely functional: how to maintain human control over machines, not how to submit all things to Christ the King.
This is the hallmark of Modernism: addressing symptoms while ignoring the disease. The real crisis is not artificial intelligence but the abandonment of true intelligence—the logos of St. John, the incarnate Word who alone gives meaning to human existence. As St. Pius X condemned in Lamentabili, proposition 64: “Contemporary Catholicism cannot be reconciled with true knowledge without transforming it into a certain dogmaless Christianity, that is, into a broad and liberal Protestantism.” The Vatican’s AI discourse is precisely this: a dogmaless engagement with the world, seeking solutions in human cooperation rather than divine ordinance.
The Heresy of Immanent Humanism
Speakers like Eli Pariser spoke of “a positive vision of human sociality that co-exists and is supported by a world with powerful AI,” while Benjamin Rosman emphasized grassroots participation in shaping AI. These proposals, however well-intentioned, reflect the modernist heresy condemned by Pius IX in the Syllabus of Errors: “The civil government… has a right to an indirect negative power over religious affairs” (proposition 41), and “Catholics may approve of the system of educating youth unconnected with Catholic faith and the power of the Church” (proposition 48). By treating AI as a neutral tool to be shaped by consensus, they deny the Church’s exclusive authority over matters affecting faith and morals.
Joy Buolamwini’s plea to “unmask AI and protect what is human” echoes the sentimental humanism of our age but offers no criterion for what is truly human beyond subjective experience. Without the doctrine of the Fall, the need for redemption, and the sacramental order, “protection” becomes mere sentimentality. As Bellarmine taught, a manifest heretic ceases to be Pope and head; thus, the entire edifice of the conciliar sect—including its AI ethics—is built on sand.
Silence on the Supernatural: The Gravest Omission
Nowhere in the cited article is there mention of sin, grace, the sacraments, the Last Judgment, or the eternal destiny of souls. The dangers listed—disinformation, chatbot relationships, algorithmic bias—are real but secondary. The primary danger is the loss of faith, the profanation of the Most Holy Sacrifice, and the systematic dismantling of Catholic doctrine since 1958. Yet the conference treats AI as if it exists in a theological vacuum, separable from the apostasy that produced it.
Consider Kashmir Hill’s observation that “many people have lost touch with reality by entertaining relationships with AI chatbots.” This is a symptom of a deeper spiritual void—the absence of true worship, authentic community, and supernatural life. But instead of calling for a return to the Traditional Latin Mass, the sacraments, and catechesis, the solution proposed is more education, more responsibility, more cooperation—hallmarks of the liberal Catholic illusion condemned by St. Pius X in Pascendi: “The Church… ought to tolerate the errors of philosophy, leaving it to correct itself” (proposition 11).
The Myth of Neutral Technology
The conference assumes AI is a tool that can be made “pro-social” or “parasitic,” ignoring that every technology reflects the spiritual state of its creators. In a world that has rejected God, AI becomes an instrument of control, manipulation, and idolatry. The miracle of the sun at Fatima was a divine warning; today’s “miracles” of AI are digital deceptions—deepfakes, synthetic voices, algorithmic propaganda—that further obscure truth.
As the Syllabus of Errors warns, “Human reason… is the sole arbiter of truth and falsehood” (proposition 3), and “Divine revelation is imperfect… subject to continual and indefinite progress” (proposition 5). The Vatican’s embrace of AI ethics without submission to unchanging doctrine is a capitulation to rationalism and evolutionism—the very errors condemned by the pre-conciliar Magisterium.
Conclusion: The Only True Preservation
The conciliar sect’s conference on AI is not a defense of humanity but a symptom of its capitulation to the spirit of the age. True preservation of human voices and faces requires not technological regulation but the restoration of the Social Kingship of Christ, the return to Tradition, and the rejection of the Modernist revolution. As Pius XI wrote, “if men were ever to recognize Christ’s royal authority over themselves, both privately and publicly, then unheard-of blessings would flow upon the whole society.” Until the structures occupying the Vatican repent and return to the immutable faith, their conferences remain exercises in futility—or worse, instruments of the abomination of desolation.
Source:
Analysing AI's impact on media, communities and inequalities (vaticannews.va)
Date: 21.05.2026