Making a difference in the world
Stephen Curkpatrick


Most people want to make a difference in the world. Only surliness would deny people the possibility of such goodwill. Yet many people are unsure about how to make a tangible difference.

People are often dependent on the ideals articulated by others for the possibility of a different world in which they can participate. Yet these ideals are neither a reliable indicator of tangible differences that can be made nor are they a reliable source of actually achieving a difference. Making a difference in the world is nearer than many realise, yet much rhetoric about making a difference can alienate people from this tangible possibility.

v

The world is not as it should be. This is an observation that is self-evident in India where there are overwhelming needs, suffering and deprivation of dignity. As the world’s largest democracy, with a population of one billion people, India defies definitive economic, political and social assimilation. These observations are true of life elsewhere, even if they are most apparent in India.

Humans are not very good at making the world what they want it to be, even if they do a lot of talking about how they want it to be. Human self-compromise and self-deception is inexhaustible. History keeps reminding us of this. A step forward in one place is invariably a step backwards elsewhere. Apparent progress to new opportunities does not account for the incompletion of previous projects or reversion to perennial compromises.

The potential for power to corrupt is consistent in every time and place in human life. The human factor is always unpredictable. Human freedom defies the possibility of knowing, by hypotheses or statistics, what humans with power might do or refuse to do next.

To ignore these realities in seeking to make a difference in the world is to diminish the meaning of Christian faith and the variegated difficulties of human life that are replicated across the globe. If in some places physical life is a precarious day by day struggle, in other places psychological life is precariously close to dissolving into nothingness.

Humans are not very good at making the world what they want it to be. In every generation, honesty, goodness, beauty and wisdom are compromised. Such compromise can compound with devastating incursions into the next generation. The quest to disentangle this perennial knot is always flawed, often aggressive in assertion, further aggravating the open wound of human compromise, which has its worst expressions in violence.

Amid human pain and suffering, small capillaries of compassion form almost instantly and through costly generosity begin to meet seemingly inexhaustible needs. These capillaries of compassion rarely register in the media; they do not figure in ideological claims and counter-claims that seek to unravel what cannot be unravelled—what Christian testimony refers to as human sinfulness.

What begin as tiny capillaries of compassion eventually become stories of discrete yet effective healing in lives and hope for communities, years, sometimes decades later. Long after a hunger for the triumph of being right would be starved, and after the need that calls forth the cost has diminished any boast in human achievement, there is a strength that could only come from God. This courage and strength to love is a true but pale reflection of the depth of triune love that continues to be redemptive beyond human solutions to perennial dilemmas.

v

In making a difference in the world, integral Christian response to human need must be specific to a context, competent and costly.

Contextual and tangible responses to human need are not abstract. It is easy to cast words at generalised issues. This is ideology. Compassion requires volition and human engagement beyond words. Durable trust is not forged through abstractions. With the reality of limited resources, decisions are necessarily made between many presenting needs, belying any appeal to idealism in its generalisation of all needs.

Without competence—to be skilled according to need and context—any tangible response lacks credibility and can make a desperate situation worse. Competence requires personal investment in particular competencies—medical, legal, educational, economic, scientific—applicable to a specific need. Competence can include dedicated time and giving capacities.

It will always cost something to make a difference. After the self-giving disclosure of God in Christ, this is the explicit Christian character of making a difference in the world. Laying down our lives for our friends suggests engaging our neighbour as friend, with a cost too. This possibility is called forth by the word of God and in grace, sustained by transformed people and communities, without the vociferous need to vaunt what the right hand intends to do.

Integral Christian response to human need is specific as tangible, competent and costly. Through responses that are contextual and sacrificial, people become intimately aware of human concerns that are necessarily given competent advocacy. This is to be distinguished from agitated, aggressive partisan voices informed by mere clichés on selective and ever-changing social foci.

Ample opportunities exist to accuse others for the state of the world. Blame only leads to counter-blame and a vicious cycle of enmity and inevitable violence. To identify one nation or tribe as the source of evil is a dualistic view of reality and contrary to Christian testimony, which relinquishes blame and counter-blame because we all participate in the perennial compromise of human life in an anxious quest for a place under the sun. Either directly or indirectly, we are all implicated in human pain and difficulties. The gospel introduces the radical possibility of the unjust being declared just in Christ, by which unjust social consequences can also be absorbed, tangibly and competently in costly Christian love.

v

It is one thing to cite famous examples of those who made a difference in the world, such as Wilberforce, Gandhi or Mandela. It is exceedingly difficult to emulate such figures. It can be meaningless to keep citing meteoric examples if we are not also informed of the cost involved in the courage they displayed. This cost often included isolated years in prison, self-recrimination and silent grief endured for the fragmented families that struggled to cohere around their tormented lives and singular visions. This also included the ever-present possibility of death.

In admiration of such examples, we are usually in receipt of a succinct saying gleaned from years of hard work with legal papers, speeches and articles or an explosive symbolic deed in unique historic circumstances. An exemplary figure is indeclinable, even as each in a singular way has affected the lives of many.

Recitation of heroic characters as inspiration toward making a difference in the world does not account for pervasive ennui in the contemporary vanity of esteeming relativities—vanity from which they did not suffer. Exemplary people might be cited and quoted with enthusiasm but rarely emulated without caricature in attempts to straddle a variety of positions in the name of plurality, either intentionally or by default in perspective or lifestyle.

Alternatively, the quiet example of men and women working at a specific need in a particular place over many years, even decades, is likely to have a tangible and durable impact on our sense of being neighbour in the world. Such examples are numerous. If we look carefully, we will observe that their inspiration and resources are often drawn from intentional faith in the grace and truth of Jesus Christ as they listened to the word of God and responded by deeds in which the left hand did not know what the right hand had done.