Church Together: The Church of We in the Age of Me

By Daniel C. Dickard and O. S. Hawkins

Church Together is a Christian leadership book designed to give pastors, church leaders, and church members a working plan to overcome the greatest underlying threat to the church today, individualism, through five relationships of surrender which correlate to the five core values of the Church of We.
Part One examines the three rotten fruits of individualism within the Church of Me--consumerism, pragmatism, and the extremes of legalism and liberalism--and how to spot each of these problems. Part Two offers a solution on what it will take for churches to make a healthy transition from the Church of Me to the Church of We. Church Together, for this reason, gives churches a manageable plan to defy the individualistic spirit of the age as they become the Church of We in the Age of Me.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Wipf and Stock
• Release date: Jan 13, 2022
• ISBN: 9781666790344

Daniel C. Dickard

Daniel Dickard is Lead Pastor of Friendly Avenue Baptist Church in Greensboro, North Carolina. He is the author of Church Together and a two-time graduate of Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary. With a focus on expository preaching, intercessory prayer, and the Great Commission, his aim is to see churches grow in health and strength. Daniel is married to Cassie, his wife, and together they have three children: Conrad, Kesyd, and Carolina.

Book preview

Introduction

The Church of We versus the Church of Me

The church stands at a crossroad. She finds herself in a fork-in-the-road moment at the intersection of me and we. It is at this intersection that a directional decision must be made. The me mindset that rules the spirit of the age stands in direct opposition to the we mindset of a cross-centered community. That is why the greatest underlying threat to the church today is individualism. The gospel says, Take up your cross and follow me. Individualism says, Take up your cause and follow self. The way of the cross calls for the denial of self. The way of individualism claws for the expression of self. Whereas individualism says, I am great, the gospel says, God is great, and his greatness climaxed in a cross. The gospel teaches that you are made in the image of God—an image that was fractured by sin but restored by a cross. Individualism twists the creationary nature of God. It teaches that you are made in the reimagination of self and that you fracture your future when you hold back your deepest desires and your most core feelings. The church then has a choice to make in this fork-in-the-road moment. She can remain on the path of me, where suffocating individuality and true-to-yourself spirituality become an impossible task in a culture of picky preferences and consumer churchgoers, or she can travel a better path—a path together. She can become a "Church of We in the Age of Me."

It has been said that you cannot defeat an enemy that has not first been defined. If the greatest underlying threat to the church today is individualism, what exactly is individualism or individuality?¹ The individualistic mindset that rules the spirit of this age can best be described with the slogans that fuel the movement. After all, slogans best orient us to the mind of popular culture. 

You be you. You do you. You are enough. Be anything you want to be. Be true to yourself. Listen to your heart. Follow your feelings. Chase after your dreams. Find yourself. Chart your own course. Your desires are who you are. You are in charge of your own happiness. You get what you give. Make it happen. You are enough. Create your own destiny. 

Individualism calls for the discovery, or better yet, the rediscovery, of self. The deception of individualism, however, is that, in its attempt toward forward-looking freedom, individuality pulls the believer back to an old nature that selfishly spoils everything it touches. The pursuit of individuality may seem appealing to the eye, attractive to the mind, and charming to the ear, but it is destructive to the soul. It looks like Hollywood and sounds like Broadway, but it destroys in silence while decorated in innocence. Be true to yourself sounds good. But it never has a Disneyesque fairy tale ending. The self-expressed flourishment of me will always stand in direct opposition to the God-prepared nourishment of we—the local church—and, in the end, self-styled spirituality will lead to self-defeating consumerism and endless soul-searching. 

So if the spirit of the age is fashioned by the letter I, the only letter than can defy the spirit of the age is a t—fashioned in the shape of a cross. If self-adulation is the church’s kryptonite, then self-renunciation is the only solution to overcome the church’s kryptonite. The only way the church can become a Church of We in the Age of Me is to surrender preferences, ambitions, likes, styles, forms, practices, and even We’ve always done it that way traditions in exchange for a cross, a place where old death brings new life. If the symbol of we-focused Christianity is a cross, then that symbol only becomes a reality when comforts, conveniences, and casual Christianity are affixed to it. The church that would bravely combat the greatest threat of today, individualism, will not simply look like a cross, wear a cross, or brand a cross. It will be a composition of believers who take up their cross. Church together, for that reason, must begin and end with a cross.

The problem, however, is that in the Age of Me convenient spirituality has little to do with a Crucified Lamb; casual Christianity refuses to affix itself to a costly cross; and comfortable men will not preach about a crucified Savior. Humanity’s vision for the promotion of self does not align with God’s vision for death to self. If churches are to transition from me churches to we churches, it will require that crucified men and women fasten themselves to a costly cross, and individualism wants nothing to do with a cross, because it is there that self becomes severed. In a culture where me is elevated above we, and in a world which teaches that the greatest sin is to constrain anyone from whoever they are or desire to be, Jesus calls his followers to a radical reorientation of self-like priorities, to become a cross-like church that values we above me.

The Church of We Versus the Church of Me

The foundational values that underpin the Church of We and the Church of Me are as different as the bedrock base used by a wise builder and the sand that slips beneath the feet of a foolish builder. The foundation for the Church of We is based on family and mission undergirded by God’s truth; the foundation for the Church of Me is based on desire and preference undergirded by my truth. While the New Testament paints a canvas of the church as family, the Church of Me is propagated in terms of me, my, and I. Switching metaphors from a fork-in-the-road intersection to a tree planted in parasitic soil, the Church of Me is firmly planted in individualism and growing off its individualistic vine are three rotten fruits: consumerism, pragmatism, and the extremes of legalism and liberalism. Each of these rotten fruits will be dealt with in subsequent chapters. For now, we set the cornerstone edges for the Church of Me and the Church of We, to show their contrastive values and goals.

The Church of We is built on the foundation of a cross-centered community where family meets mission. To be clear, the church should not just look like a family; the church is a family.² And families make sacrifices. The Church of We, then, will make sacrifices, but it will never sacrifice family on the altar of self-defeating individuality. It is said, when referring to the close bond of a family, that blood is thicker than water. The Church of We shares the same blood—Christ’s blood—and the blood that runs through Emmanuel’s veins has been transfused into God’s adopted sons and daughters. Cross-centered communities, then, being transfused with the blood of Christ, operate more like a family than a factory. Whereas factories create temporary products, families create lasting relationships. Families do not allow styles, fads, fashion, music, and personal opinions that blow whimsically through culture to drive generations apart. The church is a family but, to be even more clear, it is a family on mission. A family without mission is a weekly family reunion—full of fun but filled with little purpose. A mission without family is a religious organization that may operate like a well-oiled machine but, over time, it becomes sterile, cold, and clinical. The Church of We, moving beyond clinical coldness, is a gathering of people who crucify self-oriented inclinations and come to the realization that family is better than a factory, and a cross of death is better than a crowd of consumers.

In the Church of We, sola Scriptura (the Word of God alone) rules; in the Church of Me, sola me rules. In the one, God binds men to his truth; in the other, men bind God to their traditions. The Church of We exchanges a self-made crown for a God-stained cross; the Church of Me speaks of a cross, sometimes in convincing and stirring language, but its motto is Do as I say, not as I do. To talk about a cross is of little danger in a me-centered church, but to participate in a cross is a journey few take. Further, the Church of Me and the Church of We both embrace a cross, but their understanding of it differs greatly. The Church of Me believes in the historical event of the cross, and her preachers even preach about it. But herein lies the difference between me-centered Christianity and we-centered Christianity: me-centered Christianity rejects not the cross where Jesus died, but the cross where you too must die—just as he died. We-centered Christianity, on the other hand, understands the deeper aspects of the cross. It believes not only that Jesus died for us, but that we too must die with him. The Church of We therefore realizes the self-life is always at odds with the Christ-life, and that if self be not removed and if the Lord is denied access to a believer’s redeemed humanity, it has the power to strangle the spirit of the church. And the only way self is removed from the spirit of the church is when the church participates in the cross of Christ.

The Church of Me observes the cross, albeit from a distance, and, at times, attempts to imitate it. The Church of We, on the other hand, moves beyond mere observation and imitation of the cross. The Church of We is about participation in the cross.³ Christians throughout the centuries have affirmed the doctrine of penal substitutionary atonement. That is, the penalty of sin was placed upon Christ, rather than man, and Christ bore the wrath of God when he died on the cross. Penal substitution is simply the belief that Christ died in our place to absorb the punishment of sin. Many Christians want the penal benefits of the cross without participating in the discipleship demands of the cross. But those who enjoy the benefits of the cross without participating in its discipleship demands know not of the cross of Christ. They may know about the cross where Jesus died, but they’ve yet to experience the cross where self too must die. When Christ is our sin bearer—taking away the punishment we deserve—there are certain benefits to self. Who would not want guilt, shame, and punishment removed at the expense of another? But there is a great difference between observation of the cross and participation in it. When one observes the cross without participating in it, there is a great benefit to self at a seemingly reduced price. When Christians move beyond observation of the cross and begin to participate in the cross, self pays a great price.

The Church of Me is quick to secure its own desires, wants, and preferences and, in doing so, sacrifices the good of others for the interests of self. The Church of We, on the other hand, crucifies self for the interests of others and, in doing so, discovers that the secret to the Christian life is to remain affixed to the cross. Many churches today clamor for that old-time religion. But could it be that the need for today is not that old-time religion but instead an all-time cross? It is no secret that fire needs constant reapplication of wood if it wants to remain burning. The Christian that would continue to burn with white-hot passion must daily reapply the cross to every aspect of life lest he or she grow dim. The fires of revival are strictly contingent on the reapplication of Calvary’s wood. A church experiences revival only to the degree that those within the church participate in the cross. Where there is no cross, there is no revival. Those who say they want revival talk about the cross. Those who experience revival participate in the cross. Revival, biblically speaking, is always associated with brokenness, humility, and death to self, and, as such, it only occurs when believers are broken over and repentant towards the residual sin that remains within them. As God brings believers to the end of themselves and into total love, trust, and submission to him, it is at that point they move from a state of brokenness to a renewed season of revival. The reason, then, the Church of Me does not experience revival has very little to do with the cultural chaos around her. It is because of the old flesh at war within her members and their unwillingness to deal with it. Only as believers participate in the cross daily will they put away their old nature and any residual sin which lingers.

Further, the Church of Me comes before a crowd to make a name for itself. The Church of We comes before a cross to put an end to self. Jesus came to pronounce a death sentence on everything related to self and ego. Paul, like Jesus, said, Not I, but Christ (Gal 2:20). The I must then be eliminated in its entirety for the Church of We to flourish. A cross is a heavy price. But without a cross, the church will be distracted and deceived until it compromises solid biblical Christianity. A.W. Tozer says, The whole burden of New Testament theology is that the old self-values are false; the wisdom of the self is questionable; and the self’s goodness does not exist at all. The old self must go, regardless of the cost. In the old self-life, there is nothing redeemable. No matter how much the old self is cleaned up, it still contains an irredeemable core of corruption.⁴

The Church of Me has an exalted posture; the Church of We has a lowly posture. At one time, a me-centered church may have assumed a posture of service and humility. Over time, however, the bright lights of celebrity Christianity and the applause of adulation became more than the striking of palms together; it became the striking of egos together. The Church of We, though, refused to become embarrassed by her custodial position and her janitorial posture. She was, and continues to be, convinced that the greatness of an individual is determined by his or her willingness to do for others who cannot do anything for her. A me-centered church knows nothing of sacrificial service, because it is mesmerized by the bedazzled jewels on the crown of consumer Christianity in a way that a crown of thorns and a cross of wood cannot enthrall, unless you have experienced its power. The Church of We, then, has a lowly posture with a towel and basin; the Church of Me has the exalted posture of a center stage and bright lights. 

The target audience of me-centered churches also differs from we-focused churches. The Church of We seeks an audience of One; the Church of Me seeks well-rehearsed worship bands and choirs, celebrity preachers, and neatly packaged resources to bolster attendance. Me-centered churches prioritize themselves. The problem is that when churches prioritize themselves, worship is cheapened to personal performance; spiritual ambition turns to idolatrous achievement; mission turns inward; the Great Commission becomes the Great Omission; discipleship is discarded into do-it-yourself spirituality; building a new brand becomes more important than building a new believer; and widening your influence becomes a bigger goal than winning souls. Similarly, conferences become more about maximizing your personal network than meeting co-laborers to maximize gospel impact, and starting a new podcast to gain self-fame is highlighted above starting a new mission work that brings God his deserved fame. The Church of Me has one primary target audience: self. And while the Church of Me is good at promotional marketing and propagative publicity, there is one looming problem: its marketing appeal is toward self, not Christ. 

The contrast between the Church of Me and the Church of We can be made even more clear in its approach to church attendance. In the Church of Me, company is liked. In the Church of We, community is longed for. In we churches, family stories take precedence over statistics, and relationships are positioned above numerical records. To say it another way, the Church of We counts presence; the Church of Me counts mere attendance. Sure, counting is happening in both places, but the Church of We focuses on who is there; the Church of Me focuses on how many are there. In we-focused churches, presence is prioritized above attendance. But herein lies the great difference: attendance assumes a number in me-centered churches, whereas presence assumes relationships in we-focused churches. When the church feels like a number, having it taken away feels like a rather small cost. But when the church, centered on Jesus and focused on the spiritual growth of others rather than on numerical growth of the church, is grounded in relationships, having it taken away feels like death. 

The dissimilarities between the Church of Me and the Church of We are also noticeable in how her members understand the blessings of God. A blessing, according to the Bible, is anything that draws you closer to God. A blessing, reinterpreted by the health-and-wealth prosperity gospel movement—a false gospel preached in the Church of Me—is anything that draws you closer to your best life now. The former is about God’s fame; the latter abuses God for self-gain. And any theology that uses God and abuses others for selfish gain finds its root in the Church of Me. But not so with the Church of We. We-centered churches understand that the true meaning of God’s blessings is wanting for ourselves nothing more or nothing less than what God wants for us. And what God wants from us, more than anything else, is to love him as evidenced through faith. God’s blessings could be health, wealth, and prosperity, but they could also be sickness, poverty, and trouble. And me-centered churches often fail to mention the latter part of this truth—that the methods of God’s blessings often come through the refinery of life’s fires.

In the Church of Me, salvation has been reinterpreted to overemphasize the personal benefits for me at the expense of the cosmic benefits for all who would believe (see John 3:16; 1 John 2:12). For God so loved the world turns into "For God so loved me. The you pronouns of the Bible are reinterpreted through individualistic lenses and plural you comes to mean individualized me." The personalization of salvation, though certainly true when carefully applied and understood in a cosmically balanced way, tends to subtly oust those verses about every tribe, tongue, and nation (Rev 5:9). Salvation, while personal in its application, is never private in its discipleship entailments or limited in its reach and scope. It is a gospel for all people, of all languages, in all nations. As an aside, that is one reason the Church of Me is subject to the various expressions of racism in its day. The gospel, when hijacked by an overemphasis of personal salvation to the neglect of God’s heart for the world, no longer means in our contemporary world what it originally meant to Jesus or the apostles. The cross, though, redraws the lines of racism and proves that racism is incompatible with a gospel given to panta ta ethne (all nations). In the Church of Me, the expression is: Jesus saved me. He died for me. He lives in me. He is for me, and people like me. The gospel is about getting my sins forgiven so I can go to heaven when I die (me . . . me . . . me). In the Church of Me, it is about one (lowercase) god in three (depraved) persons with blessed individuality. In the Church of We, its anthem is: God in three Persons, blessed Trinity.⁵

The Church of Me, unlike the Church of We, undercuts the mission, service, and disciple-making mandates given by the Lord. But when individualism becomes the focus of a church, a church’s mission develops spiritual glaucoma, and the clarion vision of the New Testament begins to produce cataract-like cloudiness. It has been said that the church that focuses on mission gets missionaries. The reverse is true also. The church that focuses on self gets selfishness. The problem then is that individualism strips the church of the mission of God and replaces it with the mission according to me. When individualism becomes the visage of the church, service is out, and "serve me" is in. No longer is the goal to serve God through the church. The aim is for the church to serve me through God. The church, in this scenario, becomes and continues to be about What is in it for me? It is about what I get out of it. It’s about what fits me. The object of the church transitions from I am here to serve others to "Others are here to serve me." When the flag of individualism flies at full mast, the banner of discipleship is removed. Under the banner of individualism, the setting of discipleship changes. Discipleship ceases to take place in the corporate body and instead becomes an individual’s pursuit of Bible knowledge. However, this is not so and cannot be so. The church’s mission to make disciples and reach the lost is not an individual’s obligation; it is the marching orders for the entire church. 

In summary, the Church of We does not deny the reality of individuality in a fallen world, but rather points out and protects against the gross exaggeration of individualism in the church. The goal in the Church of We is never uniformity or conformity, but, rather, it’s strictly about authority. In the Church of We, an uppercase S (Spirit) rules with power. In the Church of Me, a lowercase s (self), though often regarding itself in capital letters, rules with pride. It ultimately comes down to authority. When Jesus is Lord of all, you get we-focused churches. When Jesus is Lord of some, you get me-focused churches. The problem, as C. T. Studd famously said, is that If Jesus is not Lord of all, He is not Lord at all. So, the cross-centered community stands in protest against the tyranny of individualism and points to the renewed cosmos under the reign of King Jesus. The Church of We believes it has one authority, the Bible; one faith, repentance towards God which results in the forgiveness of sin; one Lord, Jesus Christ; and one baptism, the demonstration that sinners have come by the way of a cross and put away picky preferences and suffocating individuality (Eph 4:4–5).

Five Relationships of Surrender in the Church of We

It is against this background and in view of these contrasting pictures that the Church of We lowers down in a posture of cross-like surrender to declare me-centered Christianity as being foreign to Bible-centered faith. For the church to move from me to we, individuals within a church must move from me to we in every major relationship of life. The church, after all, is a composite of its individual members. The health of a church is in direct proportion to the health of each individual in that church. If a church is to be healthy, individuals in that church will have less wow moments, elevating self, and more woe moments, emphasizing death. The crucified church, then, is nothing more than crucified individuals given over to the Lord Jesus in the likeness of his death. It is to be more like him, to live like Him, to surrender like him, and to be subjected to a cross like him. Many Christians talk about living crucified lives, but nothing in their lives indicates they have even begun the journey. However, we-centered churches, composed of we-centered individuals, do not vaguely surrender, but continually surrender in all areas of life. This book, then, will argue that there are five major relationships in which we engage every day. Each relationship requires death, so that others and the church might live. It will require individuals to kneel at the altar of surrender in every major relationship of life: self, God, family, other believers, and the world. We will deal with each of these relationships in detail in Part 2 of Church Together, but for now let’s begin with an introduction of the five major relational levels.

The first major relationship is self. You surrender to self at the altar of prayer. The sickly diagnosis of the church in the present age, and her overall anemic condition, is seen most clearly in her lack of praying. The church will quickly raise her hand in worship, but ask her to bend a knee and assume a posture of prayer, and the room empties. Why? Prayer is hard because it requires dying to self, humbling ourselves, coming to the end of ourselves, and admitting we are helpless. Prayer, after all, is the admission that you cannot, but God can. Jesus taught his disciples to pray using plural terms: "our father . . . give us . . . forgive us . . . lead us . . . and deliver us" (Matt 6:9–13). Why? His omnipotent and eternal mind knew that prayer is the chief means of becoming a surrendered soul, but the soul cannot be surrendered when it speaks on individual terms. 

The second major relationship is to God. You surrender to God at the altar of his Word. Whereas prayer is the God-ordained means by which you die to your will, a Bible-focused approach to life is the God ordained means by which you die to your thoughts—that is, to fallen thoughts, vain philosophies, and narcissistic ideologies. When a person has a Bible-focused approach to life, he or she surrenders to God at the altar of his Word. It is no longer your thoughts that rule, but God’s. A Bible-focused approach to life sees the vanity of fallen philosophies and walks the daily path of scriptural sufficiency. The greatest height of arrogance, the opposite of cross-like humility, is to think we have something more to say than what God has already said and to elevate personal opinions over perfect revelation. The surrendered mind understands that when the Bible is opened, God speaks. The surrendered mind is tethered to biblical truth—when it is popular and when it is not. The surrendered mind is not a casual fan of God’s Word; it is a devoted follower of God’s Word. The surrendered mind daily gets into God’s Word so that God’s Word does not occasionally get into him.

The third major relationship is the family. You surrender for your family at the altar of family ministry. When family becomes first, you come last. No longer is it about your conveniences. It is about the betterment and maturation of your family. A cross-like understanding of the family changes everything. The scope of parenting is transformed. The intentionality in the car line changes. Casual conversations can become gospel conversations. Even the conversations around the dinner table go under revision. The dinner table becomes more about discipleship and less about the details of the day. Jesus is no longer a goal for your family; Jesus is the goal for your family. Children are no longer viewed as inconveniences or financial burdens, but as your tip of the gospel spear that you will one day shoot into the world. Parents become intentional about teaching the Bible to their children, knowing the Scriptures will be in their children’s hearts when they can no longer hold their children’s hands. When you surrender for your family at the altar of family ministry, the home moves from, as Voddie Baucham Jr. describes, producing passionate people with empty heads who love the Jesus they don’t know,⁶ to producing passionate people with full hearts and missional minds who love the Jesus they eternally know.

The fourth major relationship is to other believers. You surrender for believers at the altar of disciple making. Their spiritual growth becomes more important than your picky preferences. As we better understand the cross, we likewise better understand disciple making. In fact, disciple making is a cross. Disciple making is an act of death to easy believism and casual Christianity. You die so they might live. The Church of We, at the altar of disciple making, moves from passive participation to active duty. And the soldier of Christ is always on active duty. Increasingly, churchless Christianity and do-it-yourself spirituality is praised. This must not be so. Disciple making should primarily take place through the ministry of the local church. The many tales of disenchantment within the Church of Me would make some think commitment to other believers is a waste of time. The me-centered spirit of the age teaches that churchless disciple making is okay. Many outsiders supposedly love Jesus these days, but not his church. Even insiders have been told they can do fine apart from the church. But without disciple making through the local church, the spiritual growth of new believers is stunted or, in some cases, fully paralyzed. The threat of non-discipleship is the paralysis of the church.

The final major relationship is the believer’s interaction with an unbelieving world. You surrender for the world’s need of Jesus at the altar of missions. Whereas the Christian spirit of benevolence is summarized in the phrase We help people, the discipleship directive is summarized in the phrase We grow people. The missionary mandate with its cross-cultural application therefore meets at the intersection of the Christian spirit of benevolence and the discipleship directive. People cannot grow in a faith they do not possess. While the goal of missions is to declare the gospel verbally and vocally, people often see the gospel before they hear the gospel. They see the gospel according to you before they read the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. It is at this point that heeded caution is needed, because an overemphasis on charitable benevolence could lead to confusion if you serve in the name of Jesus but bring attention to the name of self. People will never be saved by your life. They are saved by Christ’s death. And they will not hear about Christ’s death unless they are told verbally. Paul echoes these thoughts when he says, How, then, can they call on the one they have not believed in? And how can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them? And how can anyone preach unless they are sent? (Rom 10:14–15). The deeds of the gospel in pre-evangelism often precede the declaration of the gospel in evangelism. As Leonard Ravenhill said, The world is not waiting for a new definition of the Gospel, but for a new demonstration of the power of the Gospel.⁷ So, in missions, the Christian spirit of benevolence, We help people, becomes the bridge to the discipleship directive, We grow people. When you surrender to the world’s need for Jesus at the altar of missions, your comforts quickly pale in comparison to the eternal destiny of those who do not proclaim his name in salvation. 

Over the course of this book, it will be suggested that individuals within the church need to undergo a radical reevaluation of every major relationship they find themselves in, which includes: self, God, family, believers, and the world. It is argued that the Church of Me only becomes the Church of We when a conscious shift is made away from me-centeredness, and each person in a cross-centered community picks up a cross and makes his or her way to the altar of prayer, Bible-focused worship, family ministry, disciple making, and missions. My goal, then, in this book is to convince you that just as Christianity is not a Lone Ranger endeavor, the church is not a solo act. It has been said, If you want to go fast, go alone; if you want to go far, go together. Church Together argues that we, as the church, are not simply better together; we are a New Testament expression of God’s gospel plan to reach the world only as we go together. A church built on individualism often looks externally appealing and initially hides its foundational flaws, but, over time and under the weight of selfish preferences, the pressure of long-held traditions, and the convenient construction of pragmatic customs, it eventually crumbles. The church must not only come together or go together. God’s plan is that the church be together. But if the church is together, it begs the question: around whom and around what? This book argues that church together rallies across all demographics and spans across all generations; therefore, it is a family. Church together prioritizes the mission we share tightly over the preferences we hold loosely; thus, it is missional. Church together, then, is a place where family meets mission. It is a picture of the church as it should be. Its blueprint is the Great Commission. Its foundation is the gospel. Its frame is supported by the values of prayer, Word-centered worship, family ministry, disciple making, and missions that correlate to the five relational levels of surrender.

Church Together: The Church of We in the Age of Me therefore calls us to reconsider the criteria for choosing a church. What would churches look like if we decided everyone else need not center around our personal preferences and comforts? What if we gave everyone the everyday grace we expect for ourselves? What would a church committed to that kind of corporate disposition feel like? What if the criteria for choosing a church should be that Christ is central, not me? Before we look any further at the fruits of individualism in the church—consumerism, pragmatism, and the extremes of legalism and liberalism—and God’s plan to combat a me-centered mindset, let’s quickly examine how both the culture and church, particularly in the West, got here in the first place.

How Did We Get Here? 

The Culture Subtly Promoted It

If individualism is the greatest underlying threat to the church today, why did this threat go widely unnoticed in both the church and in culture? That seems perplexing, right? Why is it that a great threat was overlooked? It is not because the threat of individualism was deeply buried but, rather, it was buried deeply. And it still is. Individualism is so deeply embedded into Western culture that we no longer realize its influence on everything above the surface.⁸ A me-centered approach to life is so commonplace that we rarely stop to think about its impact on society. Most people today do not think of themselves as individualists. But nearly every major signpost points me to focus on myself, my interests, my desires, my wants, my wishes, and . . . me . . . me . . . me. Individualism sees the highest good as individual freedom, happiness, self-definition, and self-expression.⁹ Individualism’s orientation is to self.¹⁰ It sees traditions, religions, received wisdom, regulations, and social ties that restrict freedom, happiness, and self-definition as oppressive. It understands that the world will progress and improve as the scope of individual freedom expands. While this mindset is buried so deeply that it is naked to the general eye, far below anything we are consciously aware of, it influences everything above it.

In her book Enough About Me: Finding Lasting Joy in the Age of Self, missionary Jen Oshman traces the history of individuality