Through a contextual comparison of the theological ethics of H. Richard Niebuhr and the educational theory of Paulo Freire, I argue that socialization, while an essential task of moral education, is an insufficient aim. The proper aim of moral education is individual development. The intention of my argument is address tendencies towards conservative authoritarianism discernible in recent enthusiasm for the task of socialization by recovering individuality as a crucial agent of communal development. Communities tend to contract the scope of their moral care and concern until self-defense becomes their posture towards other communities, a tendency that an emphasis on socialization abets. However, individuals within communities can transcend their socialization and so resist such contraction; insofar as such individuals gain a following, their moral communities can expand and become vulnerable to transformation, both within and without. This account of individuality and communal development is funded by a Christian theological account of divine-human relations whereby individuals are understood to have a direct relation to God that is irreducible to their social relations with each other in their various communities, particularly to social relations between Christians within the church. This direct relation to God enables individuals to transcend their socialization into various communities and so creatively enact communal transformations. In fact, it is a direct relation to God that has been distorted that is understood to motivate the contraction of one's moral communities and so the emphasis on socialization. Thus, individual development must be recovered as the aim of moral education. [The dissertation citations contained here are published with the permission of ProQuest LLC. Further reproduction is prohibited without permission. Copies of dissertations may be obtained by Telephone (800) 1-800-521-0600. Web page: http://www.proquest.com/en-US/products/dissertations/individuals.shtml.]