The Pillar portal reports on the publication of “Magnifica humanitas,” the first encyclical of the antipope Leo XIV (Robert Prevost), which addresses artificial intelligence, work, and social justice. The document, presented as a continuation of Catholic Social Teaching, is analyzed by several theologians and experts in a live blog. While the encyclical claims to safeguard human dignity, its analysis reveals a profound capitulation to modernist principles, a rejection of the Church’s supernatural mission, and an embrace of the very technocratic paradigm it purports to critique, all while ignoring the fundamental truths of the faith in favor of secular humanism and political correctness.
A New Babel Built on the Ruins of Faith
The encyclical “Magnifica humanitas” by the antipope Leo XIV is presented as a guide for navigating the age of artificial intelligence, focusing on human dignity, work, and social justice. However, a closer examination reveals not a defense of immutable Catholic truth, but a sophisticated articulation of the neo-church’s modernist agenda. This document, far from being a prophetic voice, is a testament to the complete capitulation of the conciliar sect to the spirit of the age, echoing the errors condemned by Pope Pius IX in the Syllabus of Errors and the modernism anathematized by St. Pius X in Lamentabili sane exitu.
The Foundationless “Social Doctrine”: A Modernist Edifice
The very premise of “Magnifica humanitas” is flawed from its inception. The encyclical claims to build upon the “Church’s Social Doctrine,” a concept that, in its post-conciliar manifestation, has deviated significantly from the Church’s primary mission of saving souls and preaching the Gospel. As Pope Pius XI unequivocally stated in his encyclical Quas Primas, “the Church, established by Christ as a perfect society, demands for itself by a right belonging to it, which it cannot renounce, full freedom and independence from secular authority, and that in fulfilling the mission entrusted to it by God – to teach, govern, and lead all to eternal happiness, those who belong to the Kingdom of Christ – it cannot depend on anyone’s will.” The primary focus of the Church is the spiritual realm, leading souls to Christ and His Kingdom, not engaging in social engineering or technological ethics as its central purpose.
The encyclical’s emphasis on “human rights” as a “supreme value” (§54) and its call for “integral human development” (§50) are hallmarks of the modernist “cult of man” and the “democratization of the Church” condemned by St. Pius X. This approach, rooted in the errors of the Syllabus (propositions 19-20, 24, 39), prioritizes worldly welfare and secular notions of justice over the supernatural virtues and the eternal destiny of the soul. It reflects the “moderate rationalism” that treats theological matters as philosophical sciences (propositions 8-14, Syllabus), reducing the Church’s prophetic voice to a mere ethical commentator on secular affairs.
The Technocratic Paradigm Embraced, Not Condemned
While the encyclical purports to critique the “technocratic paradigm,” its analysis remains entirely within the framework of secular humanism and political economy. It speaks of “efficiency, control, and profit” (§92) as dangers, but fails to identify the ultimate danger: the rejection of God’s sovereignty and the pursuit of a purely naturalistic, materialistic vision of progress. The “Tower of Babel” analogy (§10) is superficially applied to technological hubris, but the true Babel is the neo-church’s own attempt to build a “new civilization” based on dialogue with the world, rather than on the immutable truths of the Faith.
The document’s call for “shared discernment” (§24) and its emphasis on “principles” rather than “norms” (§27) are classic modernist evasions, designed to avoid definitive moral pronouncements and to accommodate the prevailing secular consensus. This aligns with the “indifferentism” and “latitudinarism” condemned by Pope Pius IX (propositions 15-18, Syllabus), suggesting that all paths to “human flourishing” are equally valid, provided they adhere to vague, secular ethical guidelines.
Silence on the Supernatural: The Gravest Omission
Perhaps the most damning indictment of “Magnifica humanitas” is its profound silence on the supernatural realities that define the Catholic Faith. There is no mention of the necessity of the true Mass, the sacraments, the state of grace, or the reality of sin and redemption. The encyclical’s vision of “human dignity” is entirely naturalistic, divorced from the theological virtues and the salvific mission of Christ. It speaks of “fraternity” (§12) but ignores the only true fraternity found in the Mystical Body of Christ.
Furthermore, the encyclical’s treatment of “truth” (§131) is deeply problematic. While it acknowledges truth as a “common good,” it fails to identify Christ as the Truth, the Divine Standard against which all else must be measured. Instead, it speaks of truth as a “relational” and “shared pursuit” (§132), echoing the modernist notion that truth is not absolute but evolves with human understanding, a concept explicitly condemned by the Syllabus (propositions 5, 58, Lamentabili). The invocation of Hannah Arendt (§132), a secular philosopher, to discuss totalitarianism, rather than the Church’s own rich tradition on the subject, further underscores the document’s secular orientation.
The Neo-Church’s Subservience to Secular Power
The encyclical’s call for “democracy” (§132) and its engagement with “human rights” (§54) are not rooted in the Church’s traditional teaching on the proper relationship between Church and State, as articulated by Pope Pius XI in Quas Primas. Instead, they reflect the “liberalism” and “modern civilization” condemned by Pope Pius IX (propositions 77-80, Syllabus). The document’s concern for “social justice” and “equitable distribution” (§178) aligns with the “socialism” and “communism” explicitly reprobated by the Syllabus (propositions 41-44, Syllabus), albeit in a diluted, modernist form.
The theologians’ enthusiastic reception of the encyclical, praising its “nuance” and “engagement with the world,” only confirms its modernist character. Their calls for a “technical research agenda” (Tim Hwang) and “Catholic computer scientists” (Tim Hwang) reveal a desire to integrate the neo-church into the secular technological project, rather than to challenge it with the light of the Gospel. The absence of any mention of the Church’s primary mission – the salvation of souls through the true sacraments and the preaching of the integral Catholic Faith – is a deafening silence that exposes the true nature of this document.
Conclusion: A New Manifesto of Modernist Apostasy
“Magnifica humanitas” is not a Catholic encyclical in any meaningful sense. It is a manifesto of the neo-church’s continued descent into modernism, a sophisticated attempt to reconcile the conciliar sect with the spirit of the age. Its focus on technology, social justice, and human rights, while ignoring the supernatural realities of the Faith, demonstrates a complete abandonment of the Church’s divine mission. It is a call to build a new Jerusalem with the stones of secular humanism, a project as doomed as the Tower of Babel, for it rejects the only true Foundation, Jesus Christ, and the only true Church He established. The faithful are called to reject this modernist edifice and to cling to the immutable Tradition of the Catholic Faith, the only sure guide in an age of profound spiritual darkness.
Source:
Live updates: ‘Magnifica humanitas’ aims to address ‘culture of power’ in AI (pillarcatholic.com)
Date: 25.05.2026