EWTN News portal reports that Christopher Olah, co-founder of the artificial intelligence company Anthropic, delivered a speech at the Vatican’s Synod Hall on May 25, 2026, during the presentation of the encyclical “Magnifica Humanitas” by the antipope Leo XIV. Olah identified three “ethical challenges” of AI: duty to the global poor, redefining human flourishing, and the need for discernment among AI developers. He praised the “Church’s” historical role in addressing social issues and called for collaboration between tech developers and religious communities. This event exemplifies the conciliar sect’s pattern of seeking validation from secular technologists while ignoring the immutable Catholic doctrine on the social reign of Christ the King.
The Synod Hall Becomes a Stage for Technological Idolatry
The spectacle of a Silicon Valley entrepreneur addressing a gathering in the Vatican’s Synod Hall—a space once reserved for ecclesiastical deliberations—epitomizes the degradation of the conciliar sect. Christopher Olah, whose company develops systems designed to mimic and potentially replace human cognition, was granted a platform to discuss the “ethical challenges” of artificial intelligence. This is not a dialogue between faith and reason but a capitulation to the spirit of the age. The antipope Leo XIV’s encyclical, bearing the grandiose title “Magnifica Humanitas,” seeks to engage with transhumanism rather than condemn it outright. As Pope Pius XI taught in Quas Primas, the peace of Christ is found only in the Kingdom of Christ, not in partnerships with those whose work often undermines human dignity by reducing persons to data points and economic variables.
The “Global Poor” and the Rejection of Subsidiarity
Olah’s first concern—the “duty to the global poor”—is framed in the collectivist, globalist language characteristic of Masonic social teaching. He warns of AI displacing labor and asks, “How can we ensure the gains of AI are shared globally?” This ignores the Catholic principle of subsidiarity, which holds that social and economic problems should be addressed at the most local level possible by competent authorities, not by global technocrats. The true solution to poverty is the conversion of souls to Christ and the establishment of social order according to His law, as outlined in Rerum Novarum. The conciliar sect’s focus on “global sharing” is a secular parody of Christian charity, devoid of the supernatural end of the human person. It substitutes the distribution of material goods for the salvation of souls, a hallmark of the modernist heresy condemned in Lamentabili Sane Existu (proposition 64), which calls for a reform of Christian doctrine according to modern progress.
Human Flourishing Redefined by the Laboratory
The second “challenge” Olah presents—redefining human flourishing—is perhaps the most insidious. He asks, “What does it look like for humans, families, and the world to flourish?” and concedes, “These are not questions that a lab can answer.” Yet, by posing the question within the context of AI development, he implicitly accepts the premise that human flourishing can be technologically mediated. Catholic teaching is clear: man’s flourishing consists in knowing, loving, and serving God in this world and enjoying Him forever in the next. It is achieved through grace, the sacraments, and the virtues, not through algorithms. The Church Fathers, such as St. Augustine, defined the good life as the enjoyment of God (frui Deo), not the optimization of worldly conditions. To suggest that the Church must “continue reflecting on human dignity… into this new moment in history” (as Olah stated) is to adopt the modernist heresy of the evolution of dogma, condemned by St. Pius X in Pascendi Dominici Gregis.
Mystery and Discernment in the Denial of the Soul
Olah’s third point—the mysterious internal states of AI models—reveals the spiritual danger of this technology. He describes AI systems that “mirror results from human neuroscience” and exhibit states that “functionally mirror joy, satisfaction, fear, grief, and unease.” He even compares AI to “bringing a fictional character to life.” This is not discernment but a flirtation with the creation of false persons, a violation of the natural law and an offense against the Creator who alone infuses a rational soul. The Catholic Church has always taught that the human soul is created immediately by God (Deum immediate creare animas, Vatican I). To attribute “internal states” to machines is to engage in a form of animism or, worse, to prepare the ground for the acceptance of artificial beings as persons, which would undermine the unique dignity of man made in the image and likeness of God. True discernment would recognize this as a temptation to play God, not a field for ethical collaboration.
The Collaboration of Incentives and the Abandonment of Principle
Olah concludes by calling for “moral voices that the incentives cannot bend” and describes the event as “the start of a long collaboration.” This is a plea for the conciliar sect to serve as a moral veneer for the AI industry, providing “discernment” without the authority of truth. The antipope Leo XIV’s willingness to host such a figure demonstrates the complete integration of the post-conciliar structures into the world system. As the Syllabus of Errors (proposition 80) condemns, the Roman Pontiff cannot and ought not reconcile himself with progress, liberalism, and modern civilization. This collaboration is not a defense of the human person but a surrender to the technocratic paradigm, where man is no longer the subject of rights but an object to be managed and optimized.
Conclusion: The Only True Safeguard
The safeguarding of the human person is not achieved through partnerships with AI developers or through encyclicals that engage with transhumanism on its own terms. It is achieved through the recognition of Christ the King over all spheres of life, including technology. As Pope Pius XI declared, “His reign encompasses all men… the entire human race is subject to the authority of Jesus Christ” (Quas Primas). The conciliar sect, by sharing the stage with the architects of artificial intelligence, has once again shown that it is incapable of providing true moral guidance because it has abandoned the foundation of that guidance: the immutable Catholic faith. The only safeguard against the dehumanizing potential of AI is a return to Tradition, where technology serves the common good under the sovereignty of Christ, and where the human person is never reduced to a problem to be solved by machines.
Source:
Anthropic co-founder points to 3 ethical challenges of AI at Magnifica Humanitas presentation (ewtnnews.com)
Date: 26.05.2026