John Paul IIs prescriptions for humanizing the world economy are not likely to have the impact of Leo XIIIs Rerum Novarum because the reception accorded reform proposals depends on opportunity and circumstances as well as the ethical soundness and the logic of the principles advanced. Because of historical circumstances, Thomas Mores critique of the emerging agricultural capitalism of his time was ignored while Catholic Social Teaching inspired by Kettelers work, endorsed and publicized by Leo, strongly impacted the industrializing world of (...) a century ago. Whereas More defended a church seen as an impediment to economic progress by leading-edge Protestant entrepreneurs, Catholic Social Teaching was propagated at a time when Catholicism was enmeshed in the spread of industrialization. In our current world economy, increasingly dominated by non-Catholic regions of the East and a resurgent liberalism in the West, John Pauls recommendations currently seem more likely to meet the fate of Mores critique than of Leos. Implications for stakeholder theory are also discussed. (shrink)