VaticanNews portal reports on June 4, 2026, that Professor Benjamin Rosman, a leading artificial intelligence researcher from South Africa, has endorsed the encyclical “Magnifica humanitas” promulgated by the antipope Leo XIV, arguing that African voices must be included in global AI development to ensure the technology serves “human dignity” and the “common good.” Rosman, Director of the Machine Intelligence and Neural Discovery Institute (MIND) at the University of the Witwatersrand in Johannesburg, praised the encyclical’s emphasis on placing “humanity at the centre” of technological progress and warned against the risks of AI reinforcing existing inequalities, creating new forms of dependency, and eroding cultural sovereignty. He echoed the conciliar sect’s call for “stronger governance” and “greater moral responsibility,” expressing cautious optimism that wisdom and moral clarity could steer AI development in the right direction. This interview is yet another manifestation of the abomination of desolation occupying the Vatican, which, having abandoned the supernatural mission of the true Church, now positions itself as a global ethical consultant for the technological revolution, promoting a naturalistic humanism devoid of any reference to the Kingship of Christ, the necessity of sanctifying grace, or the eternal destiny of the human person.
The Neo-Church as Global Ethical Consultant: A Mission Without a Soul
The interview with Professor Rosman, published by VaticanNews, reveals with striking clarity the complete theological and spiritual bankruptcy of the post-conciliar structures. The institution that was divinely established to preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ, administer the sacraments, and lead souls to eternal salvation has reduced itself to a forum for discussing the ethical implications of artificial intelligence. The encyclical “Magnifica humanitas”—a document bearing the name of the usurper Leo XIV, who occupies the See of Peter without legitimate authority—does not speak of the depositum fidei, does not warn against mortal sin, does not call for the conversion of nations to the Catholic Faith, and does not proclaim the social reign of Christ the King over all human endeavors, including technology. Instead, it offers a bland, naturalistic humanism indistinguishable from the pronouncements of any secular international organization.
Pope Pius XI, in his encyclical Quas Primas (1925), established the Feast of Christ the King precisely to remind the world that “the hope of lasting peace will not yet shine upon nations as long as individuals and states renounce and do not wish to recognize the reign of our Savior.” He declared with apostolic authority that “the entire human race is subject to the authority of Jesus Christ” and that “there is no power in us that is exempt from this reign.” The Kingdom of Christ, Pius XI taught, “encompasses all men”—not merely Catholics, but “also all non-Christians, so that most truly the entire human race is subject to the authority of Jesus Christ.” This includes, a fortiori, the development and deployment of artificial intelligence. Yet the encyclical “Magnifica humanitas” and the interview with Rosman are characterized by a total silence about the Kingship of Christ, as if the development of AI were a purely technical and ethical matter, divorced from the supernatural order and the divine plan for humanity.
“Human Dinity” Without Sanctifying Grace: A Hollow Slogan
Professor Rosman repeatedly invokes “human dignity” as the guiding principle for AI development, and the encyclical is said to place “humanity at the centre.” But what does “human dignity” mean in the mouth of a conciliar antipope and his interlocutors? The Catholic Church has always taught that human dignity flows from the fact that man is created in the image and likeness of God, redeemed by the Precious Blood of Christ, and called to the beatific vision. The Catechism of the Council of Trent teaches that the end of man is to know, love, and serve God in this life and to be happy with Him forever in the next. Human dignity is inseparable from the supernatural order: it is elevated by sanctifying grace, wounded by sin, and restored through the sacraments.
The “human dignity” promoted by the neo-church is a purely naturalistic concept, stripped of any reference to the supernatural. It is the dignity of man as an autonomous rational agent, not as a creature redeemed by Christ and called to eternal life. This is precisely the error condemned by Pope Pius IX in the Syllabus of Errors (1864), which rejected the proposition that “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” (Proposition 3). It is also the error condemned by Saint Pius X in Lamentabili sane exitu (1907), which rejected the proposition that “revelation was merely man’s self-awareness of his relationship to God” (Proposition 20) and that “the dogmas which the Church proposes as revealed are not truths of divine origin but are a certain interpretation of religious facts, which the human mind has worked out with great effort” (Proposition 22).
When Rosman speaks of “human flourishing” as the goal of AI development, he is echoing the language of secular utilitarianism, not Catholic theology. The Church has always taught that true flourishing consists in the attainment of man’s last end: the vision of God. Contra felicitatem naturalem, quae in bonis consistit humanis, beatitudo supernaturalis in Deo consistit—against natural happiness, which consists in human goods, supernatural beatitude consists in God (St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae I-II, q. 2, a. 8). The neo-church’s vision of “flourishing” is a counterfeit, a caricature of the true good of the human person, because it ignores the supernatural destiny of man and reduces his well-being to material and social conditions.
The Omission of the Supernatural: The Gravest Accusation
The most damning feature of the interview and the encyclical it promotes is not what they say, but what they omit. There is no mention of the necessity of faith for salvation. There is no mention of the sacraments as the ordinary means of sanctifying grace. There is no mention of the reality of sin, the danger of mortal sin, the necessity of repentance and confession. There is no mention of the Last Judgment, of heaven, of hell, of purgatory. There is no mention of the Blessed Virgin Mary, the Mediatrix of all graces. There is no mention of the necessity of the Church as the ark of salvation, outside which there is no salvation (Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus).
This silence is not accidental. It is the hallmark of Modernism, which, as Saint Pius X taught in Pascendi Dominici gregis (1907), “does not destroy the external forms of religion, but empties them of their supernatural content.” The neo-church speaks of “humanity,” of “dignity,” of “flourishing,” of “governance,” of “responsibility”—but it does so in a purely horizontal, naturalistic framework, as if man had no supernatural destiny, as if the Church had no divine mission, as if the salvation of souls were irrelevant to the development of technology.
Pope Leo XIII, in his encyclical Immortale Dei (1885), taught that “the Almighty, therefore, has given the charge of the human race to two powers, the ecclesiastical and the civil, the one being set over divine, and the other over human, each the highest in its kind, and each fixed within certain limits, defined by its own nature and special object.” The neo-church, by contrast, has abdicated its divine mandate and reduced itself to a mere participant in secular discussions about technology, offering “moral vision” without the supernatural foundation that alone gives such vision its authority and efficacy.
The Myth of “Inclusion” and the Democratization of Moral Authority
Professor Rosman argues passionately that African voices must be included in global AI discussions, warning that “if your whole ecosystem depends on using tools built elsewhere, paying monthly subscriptions and sending that value offshore, there are risks.” He speaks of the danger of “dependency” and the need for “cultural sovereignty.” These concerns may have a superficial plausibility, but they are framed entirely within the paradigm of secular geopolitics and economic self-interest. There is no recognition that the true liberation of Africa—and of all nations—consists in the acceptance of the Catholic Faith and the social reign of Christ the King.
The neo-church’s emphasis on “inclusion” and “diversity” is a direct consequence of the conciliar revolution, which, as the False Fatima Apparitions file notes, promotes “religious relativism” and “the democratization of the Church.” The Second Vatican Council’s declaration Dignitatis Humanae proclaimed the right to religious freedom, a doctrine that contradicts the constant teaching of the Magisterium. Pope Pius IX condemned the proposition that “every man is free to embrace and profess that religion which, guided by the light of reason, he shall consider true” (Proposition 15 of the Syllabus of Errors). Pope Gregory XVI, in his encyclical Mirari Vos (1832), condemned the “absurd and erroneous proposition” that “liberty of conscience must be maintained for everyone.” The neo-church’s call for “inclusion” of diverse voices in AI governance is an extension of this modernist error: it treats moral and theological questions as matters of democratic deliberation, rather than as truths revealed by God and taught infallibly by the Church.
The “Arms Race” and the Absence of Supernatural Remedy
Rosman expresses concern that AI development is driven by a “global arms-race dynamic” and that “there’s a lot of money being raised” by competing companies and nations. He calls for “stronger governance” and “more moral responsibility.” But the true remedy for the evils of the technological age is not more governance or more moral responsibility in the natural order. It is the conversion of nations to Christ the King, the establishment of the social reign of Christ over all human institutions, and the sanctification of individuals through the sacraments.
Pius XI, in Quas Primas, taught that “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.” He warned that “when God and Jesus Christ—as we lamented—were removed from laws and states and when authority was derived not from God but from men, the foundations of that authority were destroyed.” The neo-church, by contrast, offers no supernatural remedy. It speaks of “adjusting the rules of the game” and “seating all the players around the table”—as if the salvation of humanity could be achieved by diplomatic negotiation rather than by the preaching of the Gospel and the administration of the sacraments.
The Paramasonic Structure and the Cult of Man
The entire framework of the interview and the encyclical it promotes is a manifestation of what the False Fatima Apparitions file identifies as the “paramasonic structure” of the post-conciliar church. The neo-church has replaced the worship of God with the worship of man. It has replaced the supernatural mission of the Church with a naturalistic program of social improvement. It has replaced the proclamation of the Gospel with the promotion of “human dignity,” “diversity,” “inclusion,” and “governance.” This is the cultus hominis—the cult of man—condemned by the pre-conciliar Magisterium as one of the principal errors of Modernism.
Saint Pius X, in Pascendi, described the Modernist as one who “puts the natural before the supernatural, the human before the divine, the temporal before the eternal.” The interview with Professor Rosman is a perfect illustration of this inversion. The development of AI is discussed entirely in naturalistic terms, as if the supernatural order did not exist, as if the Church had no divine mission, as if the salvation of souls were irrelevant. The neo-church has become, in the words of the False Fatima Apparitions file, “a tool to divert attention from modernism” and “a potential Masonic ‘psychological operation’ against the Church.”
Conclusion: The Abomination of Desolation Speaks
The interview with Professor Benjamin Rosman, published by VaticanNews on June 4, 2026, is a stark revelation of the spiritual desolation that reigns in the structures occupying the Vatican. The encyclical “Magnifica humanitas,” promulgated by the antipope Leo XIV, offers no supernatural vision, no call to conversion, no proclamation of the Kingship of Christ, no warning against sin, no mention of the sacraments. Instead, it promotes a naturalistic humanism that is indistinguishable from the pronouncements of any secular international organization. The call for “inclusion” of African voices in AI governance is a manifestation of the modernist error of religious indifferentism and the democratization of moral authority. The concern for “human dignity” and “human flourishing” is a hollow slogan, stripped of its supernatural foundation and reduced to a purely naturalistic framework.
The true Church, the Church of all ages, teaches that “the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom” (Psalm 110:10) and that “unless the Lord builds the house, they labor in vain who build it” (Psalm 126:1). The development of artificial intelligence, like every other human activity, must be subordinated to the supernatural end of man and the social reign of Christ the King. Until the structures occupying the Vatican return to this teaching—until they proclaim the Gospel, administer the valid sacraments, and call all nations to submit to the Kingship of Christ—they remain what they have been since 1958: the abomination of desolation standing in the holy place (Matthew 24:15).
Source:
African voices must help shape the future of AI (vaticannews.va)
Date: 04.06.2026