Getting AGIL—The Adaptations of the Apostles

Adaptive Ecclesiology - Part Three

Perhaps Luke’s second volume, the Acts of the Apostles, should be renamed the Acts of the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is the primary actor after all.

The Holy Spirit is poured out at Pentecost igniting and empowering a community to embody the way, truth, and life of Jesus (2:1-13).

Acts then unfolds as the story of the Spirit guiding a flawed and failing group of humans forward into circle-expanding mission. The Spirit tells Philip to catch up with the Eunuch’s chariot (8:29) and snatches him away once he’s been baptized (8:39). The Spirit pushes Peter past his convictions about what’s clean and unclean, telling him in a vision to take and eat (10:13). The Spirit places a vision in Cornelius and initiates the gentile Pentecost (10:3). The Spirit restrains Paul from entering Bithynia (17:7) and inspires him through a vision to travel to Macedonia (17:9). 

So, perhaps an even more appropriate title for Acts, would be the Adaptations of the Apostles. In fact, let’s return to the Koinē Greek of the New Testament, Πράξεις Ἀποστόλων (Práxeis Apostólōn). πρᾶξις can be defined as: a doing, or a mode of acting. It’s the origin of words like praxis. The Praxis of the Apostles, that works! Later, we settled for the Latin title: Actūs Apostolōrum, Acts of the Apostles. Talk about booooring.

What was the “mode of acting” of the early church?  The first disciples followed the Holy Spirit through a journey of unlearning, improvising, and prayerfully responding to opportunities and challenges in real time. In the Praxis of the Apostles, we see the church amid an adaptive challenge, and they become an adaptive community.

Perhaps Acts 15 is the centerpiece of a Biblical foundation for an adaptive ecclesiology. It reports a monumental development in the history of the church. The council at Jerusalem is discerning what to do with gentile believers in Antioch. Ultimately, they do away with circumcision and the expectation that gentiles uphold the 613 Levitical restrictions.

The disciples understood they were not simply transmitting something located in the past, but a living and breathing faith taking new shapes in the present. After all, Jesus didn’t tell them he had given them all truth, but that when the Spirit came, he would guide them “into all truth” (Jn 16:13).

In the Adaptations of the Apostles, we see the ongoing movement of Christ’s compassion, now embodied by the church, taking precedence over rigid and confining theological formulas. We see faith communities quick on their feet and highly responsive. Christian theology and the structures of the church were taking shape as they emerged in the process of mission through engaging new contextual realities. Mission led to ideation and then affirmation. 

The church, from its very genesis was adaptive. Its ecclesiology was formed in the process of mission. How can we get AGIL again?

Perhaps the work of American sociologist Talcott Parsons (1902 – 1979), can give us a lens through which to understand Acts. Parsons is considered one of the most influential twentieth century figures in sociology and is best known for his social action theory and structural functionalism. Parsons served on the faculty at Harvard University from 1927 to 1973. The house from which adaptive leadership theory would later emerge. In 1930, he was among the first professors in its new sociology department.

Parsons’s work emphasizes the importance of understanding individual actions within the broader context of social structures and systems. In The Structure of Social Action (1937), he sought to synthesize the micro-level interactions of individuals with the macro-level structures of society, providing a holistic view of how societies function and maintain stability.[1]

In The Social System (1951), Parsons outlines his theory of structural functionalism. He defines a social system as a network of interactions between individuals, each motivated by a tendency to optimize gratification. These interactions are mediated by culturally structured and shared symbols. Parsons then identifies what he refers to as the four functional imperatives.[2] A central component of his structural-functional analysis would later be called the AGIL scheme, the four functional prerequisites for any social system to survive and thrive:

·       Adaptation: Adjusting to the environment.

·       Goal Attainment: Setting and achieving societal goals.

·       Integration: Maintaining social cohesion.

·       Latency (Pattern Maintenance): Preserving and transmitting culture and values.[3]

For Parsons, the adaptation function involves how a system adapts to its environment. It includes the ways in which a society secures resources and distributes them to meet the needs of its members. This ensures that resources are efficiently utilized and distributed.

The goal attainment function involves the processes through which a society defines its objectives and mobilizes resources to achieve them. Institutions play a key role by setting policies and goals for economic growth, social welfare, and national security, and then working to achieve these goals through legislation and public programs.

The integration function refers to the coordination and regulation of the various parts of the system to ensure they work together harmoniously. It involves maintaining social order and cohesion. Consider how legal systems and social norms seek to help integrate society by establishing rules and expectations for behavior, thus minimizing conflicts and promoting cooperation among individuals and groups.

The latency function provides stability and continuity to the social system. It includes socialization and the reinforcement of norms and values. For example, educational institutions, churches, and family structures play a crucial role in latency by teaching and reinforcing these values, traditions, and norms to new generations.

Parsons saw each of these functions as interdependent, meaning that a change or disruption in one can affect the others. Consider for instance in the world of mainline denominations, if we fail to adapt to technological and economic novelty, we struggle to achieve our goals. A lack of integration leads to division and social unrest, disaffiliation and splintering, which then undermines both goal attainment and adaptation. If our core values are forgotten or not maintained, social cohesion and integration erode.

The AGIL scheme can be applied to analyze everything from small communities to entire nations. It helps us understand how different parts of a society contribute to its overall stability and functionality.

Social adaptation assumes increasing importance when substantial parts of life are impacted by social change in comparably short periods. So, remember the dimensions of rapid change accelerated by the pandemic mentioned previously. These transformations thrust us into the wicked domain.

According to Talcott Parsons, the ability for generalized adaptation is how civilizations advance. Social groups (families, churches, schools, or nation-states) must adapt to their surroundings, much like biological organisms do.

Using Parsons AGIL scheme let’s return to the praxis of the early church.

Adaptive. The first apostles were adapting to the external environment by securing the necessary resources and managing environmental challenges. This included physical adaptation, they met in homes and temple (2:46), economic adaptation, they shared all things in common, (2:44-45) and social adaptation, breaking bread, dedicating themselves to the apostles’ teaching and prayer (2:42).

Their adaptability enabled them to cope with external situational exigencies. They were able to secure and allocate the necessary resources to survive and thrive in periodically hostile environments. That included both physical resources (such as food and shelter) and social resources (such as skills and knowledge).

Consider for example the adaptive nature of house churches. Early Christians met in homes rather than dedicated church buildings. This flexible approach allowed for intimate fellowship and adaptability to local circumstances. Contextualization was a key feature of their adaptability. The message of the gospel was adapted to different cultural contexts without compromising its core truths. Paul, for instance, tailored his approach when preaching to Jews versus Gentiles.

Goal Attainment. The early church had a clearly defined goal, empowered by the Spirit, they would “go make disciples,” and spread the gospel “in Jerusalem, in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth” (1:8) and they mobilized available resources and actors to achieve this collective objective. Clarity about the mission ensured that the system could fulfill its central purposes and maintain its coherence.

The early church was highly mission-focused, constantly adapting to spread the gospel more effectively. This included sending out missionaries like Paul and Barnabas and establishing new congregations in diverse regions.

Integration. The early church learned to regulate the interrelationships among its component parts to ensure harmony and coordination. Integration involved the management of social relationships, the enforcement of norms, and the resolution of conflicts, all of which are preserved in the New Testament writings themselves. The well-integrated system minimized internal disruptions and promoted collective solidarity.

Consider the radical inclusivity of the early church, breaking down social, ethnic, and gender barriers. For example, Gentiles were welcomed into what was initially a predominantly Jewish movement, and women played significant roles in various capacities. Structures emerged in response to missional opportunities, for example when the “Hellenists complained against the Hebrews because their widows were being neglected in the daily distribution of food” (6:1). The early church responded by organizing a leadership structure of elders and deacons.

Latency. The early church maintained and renewed the motivation of its members and the cultural patterns that guided their behavior. That involved socialization processes (discipleship), the transmission of cultural values (the apostle’s teaching), and the reinforcement of social norms (instructions on handling conflict, and leadership roles). Latency ensured that the normative foundation of the early church remained strong and resilient.

The early church included a variety of diverse giftings: apostles, prophets, evangelists, shepherds and teachers (Eph 4:1-13). This diversity allowed the church to address different needs and contexts effectively, while holding to core values. That involved the preservation and renewal of the system’s cultural patterns and motivational structures. The communities’ values, norms, and symbols were transmitted to new members and reinforced among existing members.

Adaptive ecclesiology in the New Testament refers to the way early Christian communities adapted their structures, practices, and leadership to meet challenges and opportunities. These adaptive strategies helped the early church grow and thrive in a variety of cultural and social settings. In that sense, adaptive ecclesiology is an awakening of the core Práxeis Apostólōn, the primary “mode of acting.” And this AGIL praxis can be utilized to help churches thrive today.

---

[1] Persons, Talcott, The Structure of Social Action: A Study in Social Theory with Special Reference to a Group of Recent European Writers (McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1937).   

[2]  Parsons, Talcott. The Social System. (New ed. Routledge Sociology Classics. London: Routledge, 1991), 89.

[3] Parsons, Talcott; Bales, Robert; Shils, Edward. Working Papers in the Theory of Action (The Free Press,1953), 88-90.

---

New Podcast Episode!