The National Catholic Register portal reports on an EWTN Studios film, *Beyond the Machine: Josef Pieper and the Challenge of AI*, which attempts to frame the thought of the philosopher Josef Pieper as a remedy for the dehumanizing potential of artificial intelligence. The article explicitly links this film to the encyclical *Magnifica Humanitas* by the usurper antipope Leo XIV (Robert Prevost), presenting both as a unified “Catholic vision” for the technological age. It quotes extensively from Leo XIV’s encyclical and features “experts” like Therese Cory, D.C. Schindler, and various “priests” and “sisters” from institutions like the Angelicum and Notre Dame, all of whom align with the conciliar sect’s agenda. The article’s summary of Leo’s message emphasizes themes like “human dignity,” “civilization of love,” “care,” and “weavers of hope,” while Pieper’s philosophy of leisure is presented as the antidote to AI’s dehumanizing effects. This entire narrative, however, is a textbook example of the conciliar sect’s modernist strategy: co-opting pre-conciliar thought to legitimize its own apostate framework, all while ignoring the fundamental crisis of faith and the true nature of the Church’s authority. The article’s uncritical promotion of Leo XIV and its reliance on institutions like EWTN and Notre Dame reveal a profound blindness to the abomination of desolation that has occupied the Vatican since 1958.
The Hermeneutic of Continuity as Camouflage
The article’s most insidious tactic is its attempt to weave Josef Pieper’s thought seamlessly into the fabric of “Pope Leo’s vision.” This is the hermeneutic of continuity in action: the modernist strategy of claiming that the conciliar revolution is merely a development of pre-conciliar tradition, thereby neutralizing any opposition. By presenting Pieper as a precursor to Leo XIV’s encyclical, the article implicitly validates the authority of the antipope and his “magisterium.” It states, “the film offers a layer of context for understanding the American Pontiff’s wide-ranging treatise on human dignity as the ‘AI revolution’ ramps up.” This is not context; it is a subtle act of submission to a false authority.
The article quotes Leo XIV’s encyclical *Magnifica Humanitas* extensively, including passages like, “The civilization of love will not arise from a single or spectacular gesture, but from the sum total of small and steadfast acts of fidelity that serve as a bulwark against dehumanization” (213). This language is characteristic of the conciliar sect’s naturalistic humanism, which reduces the supernatural mission of the Church to a project of social betterment. The true “civilization of love” is the Kingdom of Christ, established through the preaching of the Gospel, the administration of the sacraments, and the submission of all nations to His divine law. As Pope Pius XI declared in *Quas Primas*, “His reign, namely, extends not only to Catholic nations or to those who, by receiving baptism according to law, belong to the Church, even though their erroneous opinions have led them astray or discord has separated them from love, but His reign encompasses also all non-Christians, so that most truly the entire human race is subject to the authority of Jesus Christ.” The conciliar sect’s “civilization of love” is a counterfeit, a humanistic utopia built on the ruins of the true faith.
The Idolatry of “Human Dignity” Without Grace
The article’s central theme is “human dignity,” a concept that, while having roots in Catholic theology, has been hijacked by the modernists to promote a secular, anthropocentric worldview. Leo XIV writes, “No computational system, however sophisticated, can create a heart that gives itself, or a conscience that discerns good from evil.” This statement, while superficially true, is divorced from its proper theological context. The “heart that gives itself” is the heart transformed by sanctifying grace, received through the sacraments of the true Church. The “conscience that discerns good from evil” is the conscience formed by the immutable moral law taught by the Magisterium. Without these supernatural realities, “human dignity” becomes an empty slogan, a worship of man apart from God.
The article quotes Leo XIV’s warning: “if technology becomes the ultimate criterion, the human person risks being reduced to data, a cog in a machine or a commodity” (180). But the conciliar sect itself has reduced the human person to a “cog in a machine” by dismantling the liturgy, suppressing the doctrine of original sin, and promoting a false ecumenism that treats all religions as equally valid paths to salvation. The true danger is not AI, but the loss of faith, the abandonment of the sacraments, and the rejection of the Church’s divine constitution. As Pope Pius IX condemned in the *Syllabus of Errors*, “Human reason, without any reference whatsoever to God, is the sole arbiter of truth and falsehood, and of good and evil; it is law to itself, and suffices, by its natural force, to secure the welfare of men and of nations” (n. 3). The conciliar sect’s emphasis on “human dignity” without reference to the supernatural order is precisely this condemned error.
The Silence on the Crisis of Authority
The most glaring omission in the article is any mention of the crisis of authority within the Church. The film and the encyclical are presented as if the conciliar sect were the true Church, with a legitimate “pope” and a valid “magisterium.” This is the foundational lie of the post-conciliar era. As the *Defense of Sedevacantism* demonstrates, a manifest heretic loses his office *ipso facto*, and the line of antipopes beginning with John XXIII has no authority to teach, govern, or sanctify. The article’s uncritical acceptance of Leo XIV’s encyclical is a tacit endorsement of this usurpation.
The article quotes various “experts” from institutions like the Angelicum and Notre Dame, all of which are deeply compromised by modernism. These individuals, however learned, are operating within a framework of apostasy. Their “Catholic vision of reality,” as D.C. Schindler calls it, is a modernist construct that has more in common with secular humanism than with the perennial philosophy of St. Thomas Aquinas. True Thomism is not a tool for dialogue with the world, but a weapon against error. As St. Pius X warned in *Lamentabili Sane Exitu*, “The progress of sciences requires a reform of the concept of Christian doctrine concerning God, creation, Revelation, the Person of the Incarnate Word, and Redemption” (n. 64) — a proposition that was condemned as heresy.
The Naturalistic Reduction of Leisure
The article presents Josef Pieper’s philosophy of leisure as a remedy for the dehumanizing effects of AI. Pieper’s emphasis on contemplation, beauty, and festivity is indeed valuable, but the article reduces it to a naturalistic ethic of “self-care” and “tech temperance.” The true purpose of leisure, as Pieper himself understood, is to make room for the divine, for worship, for the reception of grace. Leisure is not merely “immersion in the real,” as Therese Cory says, but immersion in the supernatural, in the mystery of God.
The article quotes Pieper: “Leisure is a form of silence, of that silence which is the prerequisite of the apprehension of reality: Only the silent hear and those who do not remain silent do not hear.” But the “reality” that Pieper apprehended was not the shallow naturalism of the conciliar sect, but the fullness of the Catholic faith, including the reality of sin, judgment, and the need for redemption. The article’s silence on these supernatural truths is deafening. It promotes a “leisure” that is devoid of the Most Holy Sacrifice, the sacraments, and the true worship of God. This is not leisure; it is idolatry of the self.
The “Civilization of Love” vs. the Kingdom of Christ
The article’s climax is Leo XIV’s call to become “weavers of hope” so that “the presence of Jesus may grow among us and his Kingdom take shape” (245). This language is a parody of the Gospel. The Kingdom of Christ is not built by “small and steadfast acts of fidelity” in the natural order, but by the preaching of the faith, the administration of the sacraments, and the submission of all nations to the social reign of Christ the King. As Pope Pius XI declared, “The Kingdom of our Redeemer encompasses all men… His reign, namely, extends not only to Catholic nations… but His reign encompasses also all non-Christians, so that most truly the entire human race is subject to the authority of Jesus Christ.”
The conciliar sect’s “Kingdom of God” is a humanistic fantasy, a “civilization of love” that excludes the cross, the sacraments, and the divine law. It is the “synagogue of Satan” that Pope Pius IX warned against in the *Syllabus of Errors*, a counterfeit church that has exchanged the truth of God for a lie. The article’s promotion of this counterfeit vision is a grave scandal, leading the faithful astray from the true path of salvation.
Conclusion: The Abomination of Desolation Speaks
The article from the National Catholic Register is a microcosm of the conciliar sect’s apostasy. It co-opts the thought of a pre-conciliar philosopher to legitimize the authority of an antipope, promotes a naturalistic “humanism” devoid of supernatural faith, and ignores the fundamental crisis of authority that has left the See of Peter vacant. The “Catholic vision” it presents is not Catholic at all, but a modernist counterfeit that has more in common with the world than with the Church of Christ.
The true response to the challenge of AI is not a “civilization of love” built on human effort, but a return to the Kingdom of Christ, established through the preaching of the Gospel, the administration of the sacraments, and the submission of all nations to His divine law. Until the conciliar sect repents of its errors and returns to the true faith, its words will remain the words of the abomination of desolation, speaking lies in the name of the Lord.
Source:
Josef Pieper, AI, and Pope Leo’s Vision for Humanity (ncregister.com)
Date: 26.05.2026