[Episode spoiler ahead] Last night, we watched episode 13 of Enterprise, “Dear Doctor.” Quite a compelling story. In it, Doctor Phlox is charged with the task of finding a cure to a disease that plagues one-third of a planet’s population. An intriguing part of the dilemma comes in with the fact that there are two humanoid species, of which the “lesser” species (technologically less advanced, effectively servant class) is unaffected by the disease.

After some hard work, Phlox finds a cure. But he’s conflicted. Citing “Mother Nature” and natural processes (this could be a way for the “lesser” race to rise to the top), he questions whether or not he is disturbing what was meant to be. Captain Archer is baffled, wondering how anyone could possibly withhold something that would heal millions. Eventually, they make a decision not to interfere, and only offer a medicine that will relieve the pain, and encourage them to keep seeking their own cure. He also declines their request for warp technology, which would also tip the scales unnaturally. In this part of the Star Trek timeline, they haven’t yet formulated the Prime Directive, which would have given them the parameters for making this decision not to interfere.

It really made me think.

First off, I’ve gotta say, I don’t believe in “Mother Nature” (the same way I don’t believe in luck – God is the ultimate sustainer and provider) as projected in this anecdote. However, the principles included in this episode are compelling. It reminded me of conversations in classes regarding the World Bank and the IMF, which in some instances puts the country receiving funding in a worse position than they were before receiving aid. A large part of that was an unnatural reliance on outside help and an inability to create sustainable economies internally. In other words, they gave a man a fish.

How many other places does this idea apply? I’ve had a lot of conversations with people regarding the homeless population in San Francisco. When is it right to give someone a dollar? How about two? I almost always opt to give tangible goods – a hot cup of coffee, blankets, socks, take them out for a meal (I had a good lunch with a homeless guy once in the downtown mall food court), and prayer. This is what me and some good buddies have been doing off and on for about two years or so in the Tenderloin. But the question remains – are we enabling folks to step out in a sustainable way to lift themselves out of the situation they face? Not necessarily. But at the same time, I distinctly remember a moment I had talking to a homeless man on Telegraph Ave. in Berkeley: “If people would only acknowledge that I’m here, that I’m a human, and not walk by like I don’t exist…that would be a good thing.” So in that sense, giving someone a cup of coffee on the streets does accomplish something – it reminds people that at least in some small way that they are recognized as a human being. Jesus did this plenty.

Here’s another one for you – the tension between teaching a truth, demonstrating a truth, and walking along someone into truth. This is a particularly relevant question for me with regards to spiritual development. There is definitely a place for all three of those areas, but what often happens is that one gets emphasized at the expense of the others. It certainly needs to be taught that a follower of Jesus is called to cry out against injustice. Likewise, it also needs to be demonstrated in the life of those who are leaders what it means to cry out against injustice. Even more transformative, people need to walk together into that kind of life. All three are needed.

So how did I get here? In the Enterprise example, I think the story writers were trying to portray a dilemma much like this. You can’t ignore the fact that there is a need, or that God calls people to life transformation through Jesus. So that means you can’t walk away without helping people. However, it does mean that Jesus followers need to thoughtfully consider what is the most sustainable means to bring about lasting impact in any situation. And often it’s not the easiest route. I certainly don’t have all the concrete, deliverable answers to the various societal ills or most effective tools for spiritual transformation. But I do know that right at the center of it all is the gospel of the kingdom of God revealed in the person of Jesus. So I don’t believe in luck, and I don’t believe in Mother Nature or chance or coincidences. And I do believe in Jesus, I do believe in the possibility of lasting change through the Spirit, I do believe in the power of obedience to bring about life transformation, and I do believe in intentional living that situates Christ at the center of our lives. And as 2 Timothy 2:2 says, we ought to teach others who will teach others how to live this way. That’s at the core of disciple-making.

As we walk with Jesus in that, I think more answers will come.