VaticanNews portal reports on May 25, 2026, that the usurper of Peter’s throne, Leo XIV (Robert Prevost), has released his first encyclical, *Magnifica humanitas: On Safeguarding the Human Person in the Time of Artificial Intelligence*. Signed on May 15, the 135th anniversary of Leo XIII’s *Rerum novarum*, this document attempts to address the challenges of artificial intelligence while reaffirming the “Social Doctrine of the Church,” principles like human dignity, the common good, and the condemnation of war. However, beneath its veneer of concern for humanity lies a profound theological and spiritual bankruptcy, demonstrating the utter inability of the post-conciliar sect to provide true answers to the modern world’s crises, precisely because it has abandoned the immutable Catholic Faith.
The Grandeur of Humanity Without the Grandeur of God
The very title, Magnifica humanitas, chosen by the antipope Leo XIV, reveals the foundational error of this encyclical: a shift from the adoration of God to the glorification of man. While the document claims to safeguard the human person, it does so within a framework that is entirely naturalistic, devoid of the supernatural order that is the sole source of true human dignity. The Catholic Church has always taught that man’s grandeur stems solely from his creation in the image and likeness of God, and his ultimate end, which is the Beatific Vision. Pius XI, in his encyclical *Quas Primas*, unequivocally stated that Christ is King, and His reign extends over all men, both individually and collectively, encompassing all aspects of life, both spiritual and temporal. The “grandeur of humanity” can only be understood and protected under the sovereign rule of Christ the King, a concept conspicuously absent from this document, replaced by a vague, humanitarian “civilization of love.”
The Modernist Foundation: A “Dynamic” Social Doctrine
Leo XIV’s encyclical explicitly traces the “Social Doctrine of the Church” through the “Second Vatican Council,” highlighting its “dynamic character” as a “theology of communion in history.” This is a direct embrace of the modernist heresy condemned by St. Pius X in *Pascendi Dominici gregis* and *Lamentabili sane exitu*. St. Pius X condemned the proposition that “dogmas, sacraments, and hierarchy… are merely modes of explanation and stages in the evolution of Christian consciousness” (Proposition 54), and that “Christian doctrine was initially Jewish, but through gradual development, it became first Pauline, then Johannine, and finally Greek and universal” (Proposition 60). Leo XIV’s assertion that the Church’s social teaching is not “a handbook of principles and norms to be applied” but a “dynamic” theology that “guides our reading of events in light of the Gospel” is precisely this condemned modernist evolution of doctrine. It implies that truth is not fixed and immutable, but rather develops and changes with human understanding, a concept utterly foreign to the Catholic Magisterium.
Pius IX, in his *Syllabus of Errors*, condemned the idea that “Divine revelation is imperfect, and therefore subject to a continual and indefinite progress, corresponding with the advancement of human reason” (Proposition 5). Leo XIV’s approach, by emphasizing the “dynamic” nature of doctrine in light of “historical changes,” subtly undermines the unchanging truths of the Faith, making them subject to the whims of contemporary thought and “progress.” This is the very essence of the “hermeneutics of continuity” – a modernist attempt to reconcile the irreconcilable, to make the old Faith appear new and relevant by distorting its immutable principles.
The Cult of Man: Dignity Without Grace
While the encyclical speaks of “human dignity” and “human rights,” it does so in a purely naturalistic sense, divorced from the supernatural order. It states that “the fundamental dignity of each person…is neither acquired nor earned, nor does it need to be justified.” While true in itself, this statement, when divorced from the context of original sin, the need for redemption, and the ultimate end of man, becomes a foundation for the “cult of man” condemned by the true Church. The Catholic Church has always taught that true dignity is found in sanctifying grace, which elevates man to a participation in the divine life. Without this, man is a fallen creature, prone to sin, and in dire need of redemption through Christ and His Church.
The document’s condemnation of abortion, euthanasia, and the killing of the innocent, while commendable in itself, rings hollow when issued by a figure who, according to sedevacantist principles, lacks the authority to teach infallibly, and whose very “pontificate” is built upon a revolution that has undermined the Church’s authority and doctrinal integrity. The “inviolability of human rights” is proclaimed, yet the very structures of the neo-church have been complicit in countless abuses, as the document itself acknowledges, calling for an “examination of conscience” regarding “victims of spiritual, economic, institutional, sexual and power-based abuse.” This admission, while damning, is presented as a call for internal reform within the conciliar sect, rather than a recognition of its fundamental illegitimacy and spiritual bankruptcy.
AI as a New Tower of Babel: A Symptom, Not the Disease
Leo XIV’s encyclical frames AI as a pivotal choice: “either to construct a new Tower of Babel or to build the city in which God and humanity dwell together.” This analogy, while superficially appealing, reveals a profound misunderstanding of the true nature of the modern crisis. The Tower of Babel was a rebellion against God, an attempt by man to reach heaven by his own power, without God. The modern world’s crisis, including the dangers of AI, is precisely a consequence of humanity’s rejection of God and His laws, a rebellion against the divine order.
The encyclical correctly identifies concerns about AI: the “technocratic paradigm,” the concentration of power, the risks to work, the potential for manipulation and new forms of slavery. However, its solutions are entirely worldly and naturalistic. It calls for an “ethical code,” “shared standards of social justice,” “independent oversight,” “user education,” and “international cooperation.” These are merely human solutions to a spiritual problem. The true remedy for the “culture of power” that drives the development and misuse of AI is not a more “moral” AI, but a return to Christ the King and His Law. As Pius XI stated, “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, such as due freedom, order, and tranquility, and concord and peace.” The encyclical’s call for an “ecology of communication” and “renewed educational alliance” is a pale substitute for the true “ecology of faith” and “education in the truths of the Catholic religion.”
The “Civilization of Love” vs. The Reign of Christ the King
The document culminates in a call for a “civilization of love” in opposition to a “culture of power.” This “civilization of love” is presented as a path of responsibility, including disarming words, building peace in justice, and adopting the perspective of victims. It also emphasizes “interreligious dialogue” as “decisive” for peace. This is a clear manifestation of the false ecumenism condemned by the true Church. The Catholic Church has always taught that there is no true peace outside of Christ and His Church. Pius IX condemned the proposition that “the Roman Pontiff can, and ought to, reconcile himself, and come to terms with progress, liberalism and modern civilization” (Proposition 80). The idea that “interreligious dialogue” is a path to peace, rather than a betrayal of the unique salvific mission of Christ and His Church, is a direct consequence of the modernist embrace of religious indifferentism.
The encyclical’s call to overcome the “just war” theory and promote dialogue, diplomacy, and forgiveness, while seemingly noble, ignores the reality of original sin and the necessity of legitimate defense against unjust aggressors. It reflects a utopian vision that fails to account for the fallen nature of man and the constant need for justice and order, which can sometimes necessitate the use of force under strict conditions. The true path to peace is not through a vague “civilization of love” but through the establishment of the Social Reign of Christ the King, where God’s laws are the foundation of all society, and peace is a consequence of justice and charity rooted in the true Faith.
Conclusion: A Document of the Abomination of Desolation
Leo XIV’s encyclical Magnifica humanitas is a quintessential product of the post-conciliar abomination of desolation. It attempts to address the profound spiritual and moral crises of our time with purely naturalistic solutions, devoid of the supernatural grace and immutable truths of the Catholic Faith. It embraces the modernist errors of doctrinal evolution, religious indifferentism, and the cult of man, while offering a “dynamic” social doctrine that is nothing more than a reflection of the world’s shifting values. It calls for a “civilization of love” while rejecting the only true source of peace and order: the Social Reign of Christ the King. This document, far from safeguarding humanity, further entrenches the errors that have led to the current crisis, demonstrating the utter spiritual bankruptcy of the conciliar sect and its inability to offer true salvation to a world desperately in need of it. The “grandeur of humanity” can only be found in the grandeur of God, and that grandeur is accessible only through the immutable Catholic Faith, not through the ever-shifting pronouncements of an antipope.
Source:
Pope Leo’s ‘Magnifica humanitas’: AI must serve humanity not concentrate power (vaticannews.va)
Date: 25.05.2026