A Manifesto of Technological Idolatry Dressed in Papal Vestments
The commentary published by the National Catholic Register on May 28, 2026, authored by Tim Busch, celebrates the new encyclical Magnifica Humanitas issued by the antipope Leo XIV. The article presents the document as a timely and wise response to the challenges posed by artificial intelligence, framing it within the continuity of Catholic social teaching from Leo XIII’s Rerum Novarum. However, a thorough examination from the perspective of integral Catholic faith reveals this entire enterprise as a profound betrayal of immutable Catholic doctrine, a capitulation to the spirit of the world, and a manifestation of the very Modernism that has been repeatedly condemned by the true Magisterium of the Church.
The article begins by asserting that “history doesn’t repeat, but it rhymes,” suggesting a harmonious continuity between the teachings of Leo XIII and Leo XIV. This premise is fundamentally flawed. Leo XIII, whatever his personal limitations, operated within the framework of Catholic Tradition and addressed the errors of socialism and communism from the standpoint of revealed truth. In contrast, Leo XIV is a product of the post-conciliar revolution, a usurper who occupies the See of Peter illegitimately, as the true Popes have either been suppressed or have never been elected due to the infiltration of Modernism into the Church’s hierarchy. The encyclical Magnifica Humanitas is not a continuation of Catholic social teaching but a distortion of it, infused with the errors of Modernism, false ecumenism, and the cult of human progress detached from supernatural ends.
Busch writes that the encyclical’s title means “magnificent humanity,” and this phrase encapsulates the core error: the exaltation of man apart from God. This is not the Catholic understanding of human dignity, which is rooted in man’s creation in the image and likeness of God and his supernatural destiny. Instead, it reflects the Modernist heresy condemned by St. Pius X in Pascendi Dominici gregis, where “the religious sentiment” becomes the measure of all things, and humanity is seen as self-sufficient and evolving toward a purely natural perfection. The article explicitly states that “human beings are infinitely creative, and indeed, we are made in the image of our Creator — God,” yet this truth is immediately instrumentalized to justify the development and use of artificial intelligence as a tool for human flourishing. There is no mention of man’s fall, his need for redemption, or the primacy of the supernatural life. The entire discourse is reduced to a naturalistic humanism that ignores the reality of sin, grace, and the last things.
The Heresy of Progress and the Rejection of Eternal Truths
The commentary praises Leo XIV for rejecting the idea that artificial technology is “intrinsically evil,” claiming that many Catholics wrongly fear it. This statement is a direct contradiction of the Church’s constant teaching on the dangers of worldly attachments and the snares of the devil. While it is true that material things are not intrinsically evil, the disordered use of them can lead to grave sin. More importantly, the article’s enthusiasm for AI reflects the Modernist error condemned in the Syllabus of Errors (proposition 77): “In the present day it is no longer expedient that the Catholic religion should be held as the only religion of the State, to the exclusion of all other forms of worship.” Similarly, proposition 80 declares: “The Roman Pontiff can, and ought to, reconcile himself, and come to terms with progress, liberalism and modern civilization.” Leo XIV’s encyclical is precisely this reconciliation with the spirit of the age, a surrender to the idol of technological progress.
The article further claims that the encyclical builds on Rerum Novarum by addressing the “anthropological” challenges of the time. In Leo XIII’s era, the question was whether human beings were merely cogs in the machine; today, it is whether they will be replaced by machines. This framing is deeply problematic. The Catholic answer to both questions is the same: man is not a cog in any machine, nor can he be replaced by a machine, because he possesses an immortal soul destined for eternal beatitude. The encyclical’s concern with AI’s relationship with “humanity as a whole” ignores the primary relationship: that between man and God. There is no mention of the dangers of AI leading men away from God, fostering pride, or enabling new forms of oppression and control that contradict the moral law. Instead, the focus is on harnessing AI “for the good of humanity and the glory of God,” a phrase that rings hollow when divorced from the context of the true faith.
Busch’s assertion that the encyclical provides a “road map” for Catholics to engage with AI is particularly alarming. The true road map for Catholics is the Gospel, the teachings of the Church Fathers, the canons of the Councils, and the immutable moral law. This encyclical, however, offers a roadmap for collaboration with the world, adopting its values and goals. It speaks of “subsidiarity,” “solidarity,” and “human dignity,” but these terms have been emptied of their Catholic content and redefined in a secular, humanitarian sense. Subsidiarity becomes a principle of decentralized governance rather than the divine order of authority; solidarity becomes a call for social cohesion rather than the communion of saints; and human dignity becomes a justification for technological enhancement rather than the foundation of the natural law ordered toward God.
The Silence on Transhumanism and the Worship of Man
The article notes that the encyclical is a “clear rebuttal to the so-called ‘transhumanists,'” who believe technology can overcome human nature itself, eliminating human limitations and even the need for God. However, this rebuttal is superficial and inadequate. The encyclical does not explicitly condemn transhumanism as a heresy; it merely warns against its excesses. Moreover, the entire thrust of the document is to embrace the development of AI as a means of human improvement, which is itself a form of transhumanism. The idea that AI can “foster participation and justice” is a utopian fantasy that ignores the reality of original sin and the tendency of power to corrupt. History shows that every technological advance has been used for both good and evil, and there is no reason to believe AI will be different. The encyclical’s failure to address the spiritual dangers of AI — such as the potential for creating false realities, manipulating human behavior, and fostering a culture of distraction and sensuality — is a grave omission.
The commentary’s celebration of AI’s potential to “heal, connect, educate and protect our common home” is a classic example of the Modernist error of reducing the Church’s mission to temporal and natural ends. The Church’s primary mission is the salvation of souls, not the promotion of social justice or environmental protection. While these are important, they must always be subordinated to the supernatural end of man. The encyclical’s focus on AI as a tool for human flourishing reflects the immanentist heresy condemned by Pius IX in the Syllabus of Errors (proposition 3): “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.”
The Illegitimacy of the Usurper and the Apostasy of the Conciliar Sect
It is essential to remember that Leo XIV is not the true Pope but an antipope, a usurper who has no authority to teach, govern, or sanctify the faithful. His encyclicals, like all the documents of the conciliar sect, are null and void, lacking any binding force on the consciences of Catholics. The true Church endures in the faithful who profess the integral Catholic faith and are led by bishops with valid sacraments and validly ordained priests. The conciliar structures occupying the Vatican are a paramasonic structure, an abomination of desolation, as demonstrated by the files provided. The entire enterprise of Magnifica Humanitas is thus not a genuine act of papal teaching but a propaganda tool of the neo-church, designed to legitimize its apostasy and align the faithful with the spirit of the world.
The article’s author, Tim Busch, is described as a Catholic layman and founder of the Napa Institute, a Catholic lay organization. However, his enthusiastic endorsement of the encyclical reveals his alignment with the conciliar sect and its modernist agenda. His belief that AI holds “tremendous promise for human flourishing” is a naturalistic and worldly hope, devoid of supernatural faith. The true Catholic response to the challenges of the age is not to embrace the latest technological fad but to return to the immutable truths of the faith, to pray, to do penance, and to seek the intercession of the Blessed Virgin Mary and the saints.
Conclusion: A Call to Reject the Idol of AI and Return to Tradition
In conclusion, the commentary by Tim Busch on the encyclical Magnifica Humanitas is a clear manifestation of the apostasy of the concilar sect. It exalts man and his creations above God, embraces the spirit of the world, and reduces the Church’s mission to a program of social and technological progress. The encyclical itself is a product of the Modernist heresy, condemned repeatedly by the true Popes and Councils of the Church. Catholics must reject this document and all the works of the conciliar sect, returning to the unchanging Tradition of the faith. As St. Pius X warned in Pascendi Dominici gregis, “the office of the Church is not to hand over the faith to the whims of the philosophers, but rather to protect the deposit of faith from the errors that arise from human curiosity.” Let us heed this warning and stand firm in the truth, refusing to bow before the idol of artificial intelligence or any other false god of this passing age.
Source:
Pope Leo XIV Gives AI Historical — and Theological — Perspective (ncregister.com)
Date: 28.05.2026