***
"Parsons developed the AGIL model to specify certain fuctions that any social system - whether a society, an economy, or an organization - must meet to survive and prosper. These functions are represented by the letters AGIL: A for adaptation, G for goal attainment, I for integration, and L for legitimacy. A social system, to survive and prosper, must be able to adapt, attain its goals, integrate its parts, and be considered legitimate to people and other organizations external to itself...I include the first paragraph here by way of introduction, but I'm going to comment on the second one. To start off, I want to make it clear that the mission as an emanation of the Church, the Body of Christ, should not necessarily operate on the basis of "earthly" principles, although I understand that I am undoubtedly a minority view here (see note below). That is, the church, if anything, is not supposed to respond to the environment by try to change it. Also, the continuance of the Church is the responsibility of its Head, Jesus Christ, which means that the church and Christians are just called to be faithful and leave the result to him. This necessarily involves an act of faith which the world might not understand and which might fly in the face of worldly reason.
Adaptation and goal attainment are relatively clear concepts. To adapt successfully, a social system must be aware of its environment, understand how that environment is changing, and make the appropriate adjustments. To attain its goals, a social system must have processes that specify those goals, as well as specific strategies for reaching them." (p. 501)
Note: I would once again like to turn the reader's attention to Jacques Ellul.
Ellul, Jacques. (1986). The Subversion of Christianity. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans.
"At the same time the church felt it incumbent to absorb everything that seemed to be of intellectual or religious value in past societies. This explains the tendency toward syncretism that began in the third century and continues to this day in all the churches..." (p. 22)
"The scandal is that the church tries to use political power to ensure its own authority and to secure advantages. What was pure grace is thus radically subverted into a politics of give and take. The church buys the possibility of maintaining itself at the price of concessions (e.g., to the regimes of Hitler or of the Soviets). In so doing it disavows the martyrs. Martyrs are not agitators or obstinate people. They are primarily dedicated to God. Then want to obey God, not men." (p. 127)
Thus, if his church wants to be faithful to his revelation, it will be completely mobile, fluid, renascent, bubbling, creative, inventive, adventurous, and imaginative. It sill never be perennial, and can never be organized or institutionalized. If the gates of death are not going to prevail against it, this is not because it is a good, solid, well-organized fortress, but because it is alive; it is Life - that is, a mobile, changing, and surprising life. If it becomes a powerful fortified organization, it is because death has prevailed." (p. 157; emphasis in original)
***
Returning to our text:
"Parsons' concept of integration and legitimacy are perhaps somewhat less clear. Integration refers to the need that every social system has to keep its constituents parts together. The parts of a social system must be brought in contact with one another. Interdependencies understood and organized, and the need for coordinated action resolved. Legitimacy refers to the need that every social system has to be granted the right to survive by elements in its environment. A social system is said to be legitimate, in this sense, when society as a whole agrees that it is appropriate for that system to continue." (p. 501-502)If I were to apply the AGIL model to a mission, a mission to a closed country, for example, here's how I might do it. I'm going to take the position of a consultant giving advice to a newly formed mission using this formula. Here is what I'd recommend:
The mission should have a system in place for recognizing changes in its environment and deciding on how to proceed based on those changes. The mission should have clearly stated goals and be able to determine how to best meet those objectives, taking into account such factors as the environment. To meet its goals it will undoubtedly need workers performing diverse tasks, and the workers and their functions will need to be integrated so that they together function smoothly to the end that the mission's goals may be met. The mission not only responds to its environment but also proactively asserts its place in society. The mission, then, needs to find ways to incorporate these various functions.
That's basically how the world would council the mission to proceed. Looked at in this light, the mission might well be right in taking the security precautions it did in order to ensure it's continuance in the face of opposition and adapt to its environment.
But is that a Christian approach? That is, is it a biblical one? Taken from the standpoint of the mission being, basically, an arm of the Church, it should function under the same guidelines as set forth in Scripture for how the Church should operate. Regarding adaptation, the mission should not adapt to its environment; rather, it is to be salt and light, but if it adapts to the world, it will lose its saltiness. Furthermore, the mission should operate more on faith, and less on its own determination, so goal setting should be contingent on God's will based on a trusting relationship with God. As to integration, this should be more an issue of honoring the Spirit-given gifts of the members of the mission, rather than trying to fit members into pre-ordained slots. The Spirit gave the gifts for use in ministry and this should take preeminence in determining how the collective can function as a whole. Finally, I don't think that the Bible says anything about the Church needing to be concerned about legitimacy, except to say that the world will persecute believers, which seems to me very similar to denying the legitimacy of the Church.
I hope you see the difference between this AGIL model and the biblical counterpart. Unfortunately, the AGIL model fits the Vienna mission better than the biblical mandate does.
***
I'm going to skip ahead next time and I think I'll be able to finish this book chapter next time too. But for now I need to get to bed.
