The gap between the rich and poor has increased rather than decreased. The proponents of globalisation argue that this is because the low- and middle-income nations have yet to open up their economies to free trade and competition. However, in the real world, as globalisation marches onward, nation states have become less effective because although their powers are restricted to geographical borders, the processes they are supposed to govern and the problems they are supposed to solve – whether it be monetary policy, climatic changes or social inequality – now have significant cross border dimensions over which they have little or no control.

One major concern, particularly for low- and middle-income countries, is the global integration of financial markets and the speed at which capital moves across international borders – something that was not a part of the theory of comparative advantage. When the theory was first propounded, capital moved with difficulty from one country to another. That, however, is not the case now. East Asia witnessed the fury of such capital movements in 1997 and many have yet to recover from it.

A second major concern is that while globalisation can yield benefits in the form of increased economic well-being and greater freedom for those who are equipped to seize the opportunities it affords, it has the potential for dire consequences for those who cannot. At its optimum, the benefits will accrue mainly to a tiny minority of people who sit at the hub of the process and to a slightly larger minority that can retain an economic connection to it. The rest of humanity may be left with little improvement in their economic well-being, faced with greater uncertainty as they serve the needs of giant transnational corporations made largely in America’s image.

The problem lies not with free trade per se or globalisation per se but with unrestrained self-interest. In the interest of self, corporations merge and, in the process, destroy competition. Herman Daly and John Cobb, Jr. (op. cit.) note that "competition involves winning and losing, ... Winners tend to grow and losers disappear. Over time many firms become few firms, competition is eroded, and monopoly power increases." This takes away the very basis of Adam Smith’s arguments for competition as a force that will ensure that everyone benefits from economic growth. Unless we can level the playing field, we are not going to create a world in which everyone benefits to the same (if not at least to almost the same) measure.

More importantly, as corporations compete they have geared themselves increasingly for flexible or just-in-time production that enables them to gearup and geardown rapidly in response to changing demands. In the process, workers become just-in-time employees whom businesses can hire and fire on a moment’s notice to fill a moment’s need. Man becomes nothing more than a resource, like any other commodity.

As Christians, we acknowledge that globalisation is an inescapable reality that will impact us in almost every aspect of our lives. Henry Kissinger (Washington Post, December 20, 1999) notes that "the challenge is to foster an international sense of social responsibility without strangling a successful economic system." This is a challenge that Christians should lead because we are, of all peoples on the globe, called to be a foretaste of unity in diversity, a people called to social responsibility. Christians are called to light the path that ultimately points to our common humanity, and our common heritage in our one Creator.

The World Council of Churches has provided us with a lead. It has committed itself to working with others on creating effective institutions of global governance to check the unaccountable power of the transnational corporations, banks, and financiers to operate around the world with almost complete impunity.

They have also called upon Christians to advocate and support calls for a wide range of issues including the cancellation of debt for the poorest of the poor, new ethics for borrowing and lending, limits to unregulated capital flow, and initiatives to address unemployment and deteriorating conditions of work faced by workers in the Third world.

On the individual level, Christians need to rise up to meet the challenges of globalisation in the image of America’s neo-liberal ideology. This ideology views man as self-interested individuals rather than members of a community, as essentially competitive, consumerist and materialistic, given to the maximisation of individual pleasure. This ideology produces a graceless system much like a Darwinian "survival of the fittest" worldview—a view that is clearly contrary to our Christian heritage and message.

Christians have a leadership responsibility for creating a culture in which emphasis is placed on frugality and relationships. On the negative side, as Christian individuals, we can set the example by not yielding to hedonism and planned obsolescence. On the positive side, we give emphasis to the development of strong relationships built on the basis of love, not self-interest. In work, we give emphasis to productivity and profit tempered by compassion and community; seeing our fellow workers not as mere resources or inputs in a production process but as man made in God’s image.

The Church as a community must prepare itself for a world that will be increasingly characterised by greater uncertainty in the guise flexibility for it will not be easy to turn the present tide. We must be ready to be a source of comfort and compassion to an increasingly larger proportion of people who will be faced with greater stress and loss of self-respect, and families that may be increasingly dysfunctional. Ready to restore dignity to man as corporations increasingly treat people like commodities to be bought and sold. We are, nevertheless, able to do these things because Christ Jesus our Lord has shown us the way.