Now you are familiar with some of the core ideas that surround the concept of historical context. With this new understanding, let’s push the boundaries a bit. We will take a look at a document that comes from a similar milieu as Falwell’s Listen America! but imparts a very different message.

Now that we have established the Chicago Declaration, let’s look more at the circumstances and milieu surrounding the authors of this document. As is clear from the title of this document, the men and women who composed it are evangelical Christians. As such, the authors of this document broadly share the same religious tradition as Jerry Falwell and his audience. In contrast to Falwell and the Moral Majority, they belong to a school of thought called the Evangelical Left, or Progressive Evangelicals. Many of them were in college during the protests against the Vietnam War or the civil rights movement; they saw these crises as not just social problems but as spiritual problems as well.

Figure 1. This image shows worship at the nondenominational evangelical church, Lakewood Church, in Houston, Texas. The image was taken in 2013 with nearly 45,000 people in attendance. The church was founded in 1959 and grew to a regular weekly attendance of over 5,000 by 1979. The church moved into an old stadium in 2005.

Since the 1920s and the fallout of the Scopes Trial, evangelical leaders urged followers to avoid social activism and focus instead on “saving souls” rather than “saving society.” The evangelicals who signed this document, most of whom were under 40 at the time, saw this as a false choice.^[1]

Historical Context and Subcontexts

You might wonder—evangelical Christians produced Falwell’s “Listen, America!” which warned against the liberalization of American society. Yet, a very different subset of evangelical Christians also composed the Chicago Declaration that broadly saw the 1960s social movements as something evangelicals should emulate.

How do we resolve this apparent contradiction? It may be helpful to think of historical context as a pair of binoculars: we can zoom in and zoom out and change our focus, even as we are ostensibly looking at the same thing. In the case of our evangelicals in this example, considering the different layers of milieu and context we can observe:

• What is happening in American society at large? That is, what are developments, beliefs, and technologies that most Americans would be aware of and influenced by? Are there people pushing back against larger trends and developments in American society?

Differing Influences

Yet, these particular groups and movements aren’t monolithic; they too have smaller wings and factions with their own distinct milieus and contexts. Think for a moment about how broad a group like “Catholics,” “African-Americans,” or “Millenials” might be. In some ways, it’s problematic to talk of them as one undifferentiated whole. When you read documents from a certain area, it’s also important to consider the ways that that person may have a unique perspective and background that does not match the overall stereotype associated with that group.

Psychologist Urie Bronfenbrenner developed a framework known as the ecological systems framework, which identifies five environmental systems with which an individual interacts. Although Bronfenbenner wrote this in relation to children’s development, the concept can also be used more generally to understand an individual’s interaction in society.

• Microsystem: Refers to the institutions and groups that most immediately and directly impact the person’s development, including family, school, religious institutions, neighborhood, and peers.
• Mesosystem: Consists of interconnections between microsystems, for example between the family and teachers or between a person’s peers and the family.
• Exosystem: Involves links between social settings that do not involve the individual. For example, a child’s experience at home may be influenced by their parent’s experiences at work. A parent might receive a promotion that requires more travel, which in turn increases conflict with the other parent, resulting in changes in their patterns of interaction with the child.
• Macrosystem: Describes the overarching culture that influences the developing child, as well as the microsystems and mesosystems embedded in those cultures. Cultural contexts can differ based on geographic location, socioeconomic status, poverty, and ethnicity. Members of a cultural group often share a common identity, heritage, and values. Macrosystems evolve across time and from generation to generation.
• Chronosystem: Consists of the pattern of environmental events and transitions over the passage of time and as circumstances change. As another example, one might consider the increase in opportunities for women to pursue a career during the last thirty years.

Figure 1. Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory shows the various influences impacting a person’s development. Think about ways each of these systems might have impacted the authors of the documents we’ve read.

A key takeaway from this example is that even though evangelical Christians might share a common approach to the Bible or an appreciation of figures like the famous revivalist Billy Graham, they do not always see the world the same way. The same is true of people who claim membership of the same group. For example, just because someone professes to be a feminist does not mean they share the same opinions as other feminists.

Religion and History

Altogether, we have seen how a particular religious milieu can shape how people perceive society around them. You don’t necessarily need a religious faith of your own to understand that this has been a powerful force that shaped the worldviews of many Americans at key moments in our history. The American Association for State and Local History lists a number of reasons why a knowledge of religious context is essential to the study of history and other disciplines.^[2]

• “It promotes greater understanding of people…When their religious commitment infuses their entire outlook, everything from politics to business to architecture to recreation will be influenced by that worldview. An identity is created that is inseparable from everything else. Understanding our religious history can help us to see the complexities amongst people, and perhaps help us to understand where they are coming from, even when we may not agree with them.”
• It can provide both inspiration and warning. “Concepts of love, hope, peace, and justice are inseparable from many religious belief systems and have been positively used by many to change the country for the better (the civil rights movement quickly comes to mind). A proper understanding of the motivation that people have can inspire others to follow the path already trod. Alternately, many have misused and abused religion to achieve a variety of ends throughout history. Understanding this can inspire people to be careful how they use their beliefs, and ultimately learn from the mistakes of the past.”
• A study of religious context can also shed light onto topics not normally associated with religion. For example, a knowledge of the Mormon worldview is essential to understanding the development of Utah and other places in the mountain west. Or consider how the Shakers’ hymns (such as “Simple Gifts”) and even their famously well-crafted furniture have a significance that lasted well after the Shakers died out. To fully appreciate these legacies, it’s helpful to be aware of Shaker values of community, simplicity, and utopianism.

Conclusion

We have seen that the simple idea of “context” is actually rather complex and multilayered. There is no one “context” but many ways to consider the environment in which a document is written. Not only is there a context for, say, America in the 1970s, but social movements and communities have their own distinct milieus as well. Determining what these milieus are can be challenging, but the reward is great: you’ll have an understanding of history that transcends a rigid, straightforward reading of any text. By seeing it through the light of its context, its fuller meaning and significance can be understood. In a recent episode from the Star Trek franchise, a starship captain told a crewperson that “context is for kings.” For the student of history this is certainly true. A keen and multilayered awareness of context is often the difference between reading history and understanding history.