The Prophecy of a Company. An exhibition at the Rimini Meeting

We are publishing extensive extracts from the catalogue of the exhibition “Léon Harmel – La profezia di un’impresa”. Organised by the Costruiamo il Futuro Foundation and the Compagnia delle Opere, and curated by Ubaldo Casotto and Francesco Cassese, the exhibition is on display at the Rimini Meeting, which Pope Leo XIV is due to visit today.

   

Léon Harmel (1829–1915), a French wool industrialist, was the first industrialist to apply the social doctrine of the Church, anticipating many of its themes through the establishment of the ‘Christian Corporation’ at his family’s wool mill in Val-des-Bois (Marne). Cardinal Alessandro Lualdi, Archbishop of Palermo, who had known him when he was rector of the Lombard Seminary, said of him: “In my eyes, he was the one who put the social doctrines of Leo XIII into practice”. It can be stated with certainty that, when writing the encyclical "Rerum novarum", Pope Leo XIII had Harmel’s work very much in mind, whose “social laboratory” began in the 1870s. The encyclical by Pope Vincenzo Gioacchino Pecci was published in 1891.

Luigi Giussani, who was familiar with the work of Léon Harmel, spoke in his lectures at the Catholic University about the ‘social question’ addressed in the encyclical: ‘When Leo XIII wrote “Rerum novarum”, he was so far ahead of his time that the liberal press branded him a socialist and subversive Pope, and the encyclical was all but buried, only to be rediscovered much later. Had the Catholic industrialists of that time, rather than merely donating bell towers or pews to churches, taken "Rerum novarum" seriously, it may well be that the relationship between the Church and the general public would have been profoundly different.”

It can rightly be said of Léon Harmel that faith was the source of all his actions. For him, faith was not confined solely to certain devotional and moral spheres, but shaped his entire life as the guiding principle behind every public or private action.

In Val-des-Bois, where the Harmel Frères wool mill was based, he established a ‘Christian corporation’ which served as a model for the co-operative management of a business and its welfare scheme – an example that was decades ahead of its time in terms of corporate social responsibility. “Harmel – as Catia Eliana Gentilucci puts it – can be regarded as the forerunner of corporate social responsibility, the theory of which reached its zenith in the thinking of Robert E. Freeman”.

The economist Marco Martini writes: “Social doctrine and its principles are founded on the event of Christ, the God-man, who reveals to humankind its very humanity and sets it free, recreating a new humanity. The new awareness generated by the event of Christ has led us to perceive as problems facts that previously seemed indisputable. A case in point is slavery.” For – as Don Luigi Giussani constantly reiterated – Christianity is first and foremost a story, which in turn embodies all its anthropological, cosmological and moral implications.

Harmel, who according to certain criteria might be described as a traditionalist Catholic, lived at the height of the Second Industrial Revolution and found the plight of the workers and their families unbearable. He described the poverty he witnessed as “the horrific wound that is devouring society”.

In France, the Le Chapelier Act (14 June 1791) had laid the foundations for the most unbridled free-market capitalism, abolishing all intermediary bodies (guilds, trade associations) and the right to strike, banning workers’ cooperatives, and effectively prohibiting trade unions in the name of freedom of enterprise. Workers were thus left to fend for themselves, caught between unbridled, unregulated capitalism on the one hand and the State on the other. Labour became a commodity; supply far outstripped demand; wages were starvation wages. “The factory,” writes Harmel, “has made the worker poorer than Lazarus; it has plunged him into irremediable misery, into a moral destitution unknown in past centuries.” He devoted his life to ensuring that the dignity of workers was recognised, along with their right to be the primary agents in addressing their own needs, in representing their rights, and in managing the enterprises established to satisfy their needs and ‘their interests’. To his children he would say: ‘The happiness of our workers shall be the focus of your concern.’

He rejected the charitable paternalism of the Catholic industrialists of the time. He did not want to do good for the workers; he wanted to work with the workers. He spoke of ‘the Christian emancipation of the working classes through institutions that promote their social advancement’. Rosanna Marsala, a historian of political doctrines and institutions, writes that Harmel’s faith in popular initiative made him a true practitioner of the principle of subsidiarity. His motto was: “The good of the worker, through the worker and with him, never without him and, all the more so, never in spite of him”. For Harmel, promoting workers’ initiative was an educational responsibility and an imitation of Christ: “I no longer call you servants; I have called you friends” (John 15:15). To the French Catholic industrialists who criticised him, he replied: “Workers are very keen to take charge of their own affairs, and they are right.”

Léon began working alongside his father in 1853 and, in 1854, at the age of twenty-five, took over the management of the factory. He was tireless, writing thirty letters and holding ten meetings a day: “I do not believe in tiredness”. In 1870, his wife died, leaving him with eight children. In 1887, he became deputy general secretary of the ‘Opera dei circoli’; he left the company to his children so that he could tour France as a lecturer and, from 1891, as a promoter of "Rerum novarum". His son Felix, who had succeeded him at the helm, died in 1899, and Léon, aged seventy, returned to the company. He ran the company until 1911. He died of pneumonia in Nice in 1915.

His work can be summarised by the term ‘Christian corporation’ (‘a religious and economic association formed by the families of employers and workers’), a legally recognised institution that brought together religious, charitable and economic initiatives centred on the factory: Harmel “sought to create a working community in which every person, man and woman, could develop their professional skills whilst respecting the freedom and dignity of the individual, and where the workers themselves would manage a range of social initiatives” (Rosanna Marsala).

He introduced innovations that seemed absurd at the time. Terraced houses for workers’ families near the factory, each with its own plot of land for growing a vegetable garden, family allowances, a mutual aid fund, a health service, consumer co-operatives, people’s banks, social security benefits, pensions, a centre for social studies, support for organising trade unions, social facilities, schools, a theatre and a ‘social centre’ with a billiards room, library and café, management committees and profit-sharing schemes. All of this was run by a democratic, co-operative-style organisation, the aforementioned ‘Christian corporation’. He founded the Confraternité Notre Dame de l’usine in Reims (7,000 members): a support centre for workers based on voluntary work and free advice from lawyers, doctors and solicitors, legal assistance, job matching, and a consumer co-operative for bulk purchases. He also founded the Fraternal Union of Commerce and Industry, which brings together thousands of traders and publishes a directory distributed throughout France listing products for which it guarantees compliance with a code of ethics in their production.

But the most revolutionary development, dating back to 1883, was the Works Council, a body comprising delegates from the owners and the factory, in which the workers became ‘true co-operators’.

They attempted to categorise Léo Harmel according to the conservative/progressive dichotomy, first placing him amongst the traditionalists and then accusing him of socialism (like Leo XIII), without realising that it is his grounding in the tradition of the Church that enables him to be profoundly innovative. A ‘faithfully traditional’ Christianity accompanied by ‘bold initiatives’, as Monsignor Henry-Louis Chapon, Bishop of Nice, put it: ‘He had found inspiration in the intellect of the faith.’ And this enabled him, as the historian and jurist Adrien Dansette puts it, to be ‘a man half a century ahead of his time’.

On 10 May 2025, shortly after his election, Pope Leo XIV spoke before the College of Cardinals of a “courageous and confident dialogue with the contemporary world in all its various components and realities”. He said: “I have decided to take the name Leo XIV. There are several reasons for this, but chiefly because Pope Leo XIII, with his historic encyclical "Rerum novarum", addressed social issues in the context of the first great industrial revolution; and today the Church offers its wealth of social teaching to all in response to another industrial revolution and the developments in artificial intelligence, which present new challenges for the defence of human dignity, justice and work”.

In keeping with this premise, on 15 May 2026, the 135th anniversary of "Rerum novarum", Leo XIV signed the encyclical "Magnifica humanitas". Described by many as an encyclical on artificial intelligence, it is in fact a document of primarily anthropological significance, as stated in its subtitle: ‘On the protection of the human person’, which is the task that the Pope recognises as central to the Church ‘in the age of artificial intelligence’. Leo XIV makes this clear from the very first lines: “Every generation inherits the task of shaping its own age: of allowing history to mature as a place where the dignity of every person is safeguarded.” At the conclusion of an exhibition on Léon Harmel and his influence on the Church’s social doctrine, from the vast array of themes touched upon in "Magnifica humanitas" we shall briefly highlight three, which complement and bring to the present day the journey undertaken thus far.

What is humanity? What does it mean to place the person at the centre? Leo XIV defines the essence, value and dignity of the human person by quoting Saint Augustine: “You have made us for yourself, and our hearts are restless until they rest in you.” He comments as follows: “God, in fact, has inscribed in our hearts a desire for happiness that encompasses all dimensions of life, and the Church, in dialogue with the men and women of our time, feels the urgency to safeguard and direct this aspiration towards its deepest truth.”

The human person, who is by nature a being of infinite longing, is the true measure of progress, says the Pope. We are faced with the ‘illusion of technology that promises to free us from all fragility’, but ‘true fulfilment does not come from the removal of fragility’; ‘progress is measured by the dignity of each individual and the good of all peoples’.

The issue of work as a ‘social issue’. Quoting Saint John Paul II, who “reminded us that unemployment is a grave evil and that, especially when it reaches massive proportions, it can become a veritable social calamity, which places a special burden of responsibility on the State”. But work is not merely a matter of income; “it remains a fundamental dimension of human experience: not merely a means of livelihood, but a place of self-expression, of relationships, and of contribution to the community”.

There is a crucial point to note in this regard, which further illustrates the centrality of the individual, and that is the issue of training. “In this transition, it is not enough to react when jobs disappear; rather, we must proactively manage the transformation. Every introduction of automation and AI should be accompanied by verifiable measures to safeguard employment, provide upskilling and ensure worker participation; active policies must make lifelong learning accessible to all.”

Subsidiarity as a method. The encyclical places particular emphasis on the principle of subsidiarity (mentioned 23 times), which Leo XIV adopts as a methodological principle. Indeed, he speaks of the ‘logic of subsidiarity’ and identifies its origin precisely in the centrality of the person: ‘The principle of subsidiarity arises from the very same view of the person that has guided our reflection on dignity and the common good. If every woman and every man are called to become protagonists of their own lives and to participate in the building of society, then social organisation too must respect and foster this responsibility’. And there is one word that frequently recurs as a synonym for subsidiarity: cooperation (‘more effective forms of cooperation and international institutions’, ‘building forms of cooperation that respect the different levels of the global community’, ‘paths of sharing, cooperation and mutual care, learning to think and act in terms of community’, ‘let us enter into cooperative relationships and learn to build together’). Leo XIV cites the example of Nehemiah, who rebuilt Jerusalem: a man who “hears the cry of a wounded city” and thus becomes aware of his responsibility. No more and no less than what is required of us today – says the Pope – “our vocation, in this age of digital transformation, is not to be resigned spectators of social and cultural divisions, nor mere commentators on the ruins, but women and men who enter the building sites of history – research laboratories, technology firms, schools, the media, institutions and local communities – to rebuild what has collapsed and protect what is vulnerable”.

As Léon Harmel wrote to Pius X: “Dear Holy Father, being of one’s own time, understanding one’s own time, and living in step with one’s own time has always seemed to us an indispensable means of working effectively to make it a better place”.