"Magnifica Humanitas" is No "Rerum Novarum"

At the risk of seemingly disagreeing with "Magnfica Humanitas," it is still possible to compare that document with Rerum Novarum, upon which the new encyclical is based, and see clear differences, beyond the specific problems tackled by each document.

At the risk of downplaying artificial intelligence impact, which many could characterize as a general-purpose technology that will transform nearly every industry, the encyclical Rerum Novarum ("Of New Things"), issued by Pope Leo XIII on May 15, 1891, was not addressed “merely” to the impact of the industrial revolution on workers.

Laissez-faire economics; private property; socialist and Marxist ideas were paramount issues also tackled by Rerum Novarum. 

To the extent that Pope Leo XIV’s encyclical Magnifica Humanitas is modeled purposefully on Rerum Novarum, we can compare the two documents.

To be sure, Rerum Novarum focused on:

• potential exploitation of the working class

• Protecting workers

• Materialism, moral and spiritual issues

• ideological extremes (unregulated capitalism and socialism).

But Rerum Novarum also clearly established some clear and practical guidance for Catholic social teaching that are unmatched by any other religion or spiritual belief. 

Catholic social teaching means the Catholic church is clearly and officially:

• Opposed to socialism and collectivist economics

• A supporter of the fundamental right of private property

• A supporter of the right to form trade unions and other intermediate social institutions

• A supporter of market-based economies. 

Magnifica Humanitas is focused on AI’s impact on human dignity. And, to be sure, it warns of the dangers of concentrated “technocratic” power. 

But calls for ethical governance, transparency, accountability, subsidiarity (participation by communities), solidarity and orienting technology toward the common good and human flourishing are not in the same league as opposing both unrestrained capitalism and socialism (communism). 

Rerum Novarum defended the right of private property, for example. So Magnifica Humanitas might criticize unethical behavior, but it does not call for expropriation.

Magnifica Humanitas argues for an AI that serves humanity, not dominates it. We might see that as in line with the argument of Rerum Novarum. Some possible differences are that Rerum Novarum had more direct and practical implications. 

Rerum Novarum:

• Made opposition to socialism foundational for Catholic social teaching

• Specifically supported the role of labor unions and other social groupings

• Supports private property rights as essential for human freedom and creativity

• Supports market-based economics. 

Magnifica Humanitas, in my reading, includes nothing similar. 

Socialists and other leftists might argue Magnifica Humanitas supports expropriation of an AI firm’s  property. Since Rerum Novarum, that is in conflict with Catholic social teaching. 

Magnifica Humanitas contains no similar institutional practices (supporting labor unions as a counterweight and many types of intermediate institutions (family, guilds, social organizations) as a way of restraining the exercise of all social power by the state. 

Magnifica Humanitas contains no new proposals for restricting market economies or embracing socialism or expropriation. 

Instead, it is a moral exhortation; a statement of principles; a broad action to exercise prudence.  

As Rerum Novarum arguably shaped moral discourse, legitimized reforms, and encouraged balanced responses over revolution, so Magnifica Humanitas attempts the same. 

Still, one might read the new document as offering few practical pillars, compared to Rerum Novarum.