Me Verses We

I am a "we" person. I believe that we should live our lives helping each other and that we should always consider the feelings and opinions of others. "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you," Luke 6:31. (The presumption is that if we all live by this principle there will be peace and harmony.) The polar opposite of a "we person" is a "me person". A me person believes in "rugged individualism", if everyone would just buck-up and put-their-oar-in, the world would be a better place. (The presumption is that everyone is capable of putting their oar-in equally.) The Biblical backing for this belief is that God sacrificed His son for the individual, not the community. All people are born into sin and it is the individual that must struggle to find salvation. Salvation is not obtained by a committee that meets and agrees upon what needs to be done to obtain salvation after a series of compromises. God set down black and white rules which are non-negotiable. No committee can meet to bend and twist these rules to decide what is right and what is wrong. There is an absolute right and an absolute wrong. Pure evil exists in this world and any method used to defeat it is: just, righteous and necessary.

I used to assume that there was a "higher moral ground" to which both sides could ascend, meet and agree upon. The most obvious point of agreement to me was the principle of helping those in need. Following are two stories that illustrate this principle and reinforce why I believe this principle of helping others is the universal "higher moral ground".

"The Ominous Word 'liberality'"

Two gentlemen come to call on Ebenezer Scrooge for a charitable donation on Christmas Eve. From Charles Dickens' A Christmas Carol:

"Scrooge and Marley's, I believe," said one of the gentlemen, referring to his list. "Have I the pleasure of addressing Mr. Scrooge, or Mr. Marley?"
"Mr. Marley has been dead these seven years," Scrooge replied. "He died seven years ago, this very night."
"We have no doubt his liberality is well represented by his surviving partner," said the gentleman, presenting his credentials.
It certainly was; for they had been two kindred spirits. At the ominous word "liberality," Scrooge frowned, and shook his head, and handed the credentials back.
"At this festive season of the year, Mr. Scrooge," said the gentleman, taking up a pen, "it is more than usually desirable that we should make some slight provision for the Poor and Destitute, who suffer greatly at the present time. Many thousands are in want of common necessaries; hundreds of thousands are in want of common comforts, sir."
"Are there no prisons?" asked Scrooge.
"Plenty of prisons," said the gentleman, laying down the pen again.
"And the Union workhouses?" demanded Scrooge. "Are they still in operation?"
"They are. Still," returned the gentleman, "I wish I could say they were not."
"The Treadmill and the Poor Law are in full vigor, then?" said Scrooge.
"Both very busy, sir."
"Oh! I was afraid, from what you said at first, that something had occurred to stop them in their useful course," said Scrooge. "I'm very glad to hear it."
"Under the impression that they scarcely furnish Christian cheer of mind or body to the multitude," returned the gentleman, "a few of us are endeavoring to raise a fund to buy the Poor some meat and drink and means of warmth. We choose this time, because it is a time, of all others, when Want is keenly felt, and Abundance rejoices. What shall I put you down for?"
"Nothing!" Scrooge replied.
"You wish to be anonymous?"
"I wish to be left alone," said Scrooge. "Since you ask me what I wish, gentlemen, that is my answer. I don't make merry myself at Christmas and I can't afford to make idle people merry. I help to support the establishments I have mentioned - they cost enough; and those who are badly off must go there."
"Many can't go there; and many would rather die."
"If they would rather die," said Scrooge, "they had better do it, and decrease the surplus population. Besides - excuse me - I don't know that."
"But you might know it," observed the gentleman.
"It's not my business," Scrooge returned. "It's enough for a man to understand his own business, and not to interfere with other people's. Mine occupies me constantly. Good afternoon, gentlemen!"
Seeing clearly that it would be useless to pursue their point, the gentlemen withdrew. Scrooge returned to his labors with an improved opinion of himself, and in a more facetious temper than was usual with him.

A story with the very same moralistic message is told by Jesus Christ in the book of Matthew from the New Testament of the Bible. Matthew 25: 34-46 (New International Version):

"The Least of These"

"Then the King will say to those on his right, 'Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.'"

"Then the righteous will answer him, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?'"

 "The King will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.'" "Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.'"

 "They also will answer, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?'"

 "He will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.'" "Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.'"

Both stories tell us to care for our fellow man. It is not a stretch to suggest that most people would agree with this basic concept of "charity". One would naturally assume that if people agree that the poor need to be helped that people would also agree upon the motives for meeting their needs. Yet, in fact "me-people" disagree entirely with the motives of the "we-people" who try to help the needy. The disagreement has nothing to do with the physical aspects of providing aid to the needy, such as money or the transportation of the goods and the delivery of services to the needy. This disagreement has everything to do with the motives (reasons) for giving aid. The motives are the basis for why people are split into two camps and cannot see eye-to-eye on any issue even one as basic as helping those in need. This basic split on motives forms a never-ending debate over what is best for humankind. "We people" tend to assume the "higher moral ground" is that man should care for the whole of humanity. According to "me people" that "given" is entirely man-made and therefore it is on much lower moral ground than God's moral ground. "Me people" insists that the higher moral ground is to doing God's will. "We people" try to find common ground here by pointing out that Jesus taught us to care for one another. However, "me people" counter with the point that since God is only interested in the individual soul you are not doing God's will (the higher moral ground) unless you are continually seeking God's guidance and doing what He wants. If God directs you to care for the needy then yes you are on the higher moral ground, but not because you are helping others. The reason you are on higher moral ground is due to the fact that you are doing what God directs you to do.

If you get the order of these actions backward, not only are you going against God's will, but your actions of helping the needy are motivated by selfishness. You just want to make yourself look good. You are stealing God's thunder. If you are directed by God to help the needy the action is pure and righteous. The glory of the action is going to God where it belongs. So, only by continual diligence to God's words (the Bible) and God's voice (in prayer) can you truly do anything from a state of righteousness. All actions performed outside of this state of righteousness are meaningless and self-serving. Actions must be FOR God; not for self and not for the person you are helping.

So, within this context, just because someone is a "me-person" doesn't necessarily mean that they are "living for self". A "me-person" in this context is serving God to the nth degree. Still, for me, as a white American, I wish I could look a black American in the eye and tell them that I'm glad that my forefathers saw that slavery was immoral, nipped it in the bud and allowed blacks to enter America on equal footing. Instead I have to avert my eyes and explain my forefather's "me-person" logic: "Well, my forefathers would have helped your race if God had directed them to do so. You wouldn't want my forefathers to go against God's will now, would you? For over 400 years my forefathers selflessly acted on God's behalf to keep your race enslaved. They tirelessly fought-off Satan and their own desires to free your race from bondage, because they knew if they did not free you for God's glory then the act was self-serving and an empty gesture. I don't know what God was punishing your race for, but it must have been something really awful. Now that you know that it was God that was set against your race and not the white race, don't you feel better? Wasn't my forefather's passion to follow God's will inspiring to you? Kind of makes you want to give me a big hug doesn't it?"

"Hey, Native Americans, come here. Have I got an inspiring story to tell you!" Obviously the "me-person" is self-serving and simply using God as white-wash.