What is the Communion of Reformed Evangelical Churches' official stance on suffrage and household voting?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
The Communion of Reformed Evangelical Churches (CREC) does not appear to have an official, centralized denominational pronouncement explicitly calling for repeal of the 19th Amendment or instituting household voting nationwide; however, prominent CREC leaders—most notably co‑founder Doug Wilson—and at least some member pastors have publicly advocated for household voting or criticized women’s suffrage, and the network’s polity grants individual congregations latitude on certain practices, which has allowed those views to gain visibility [1] [2] [3] [4].
1. CREC’s formal structure and doctrinal autonomy: no single, uniform policy on this question
The Communion of Reformed Evangelical Churches is a loose federation of over 100–130 churches that adheres broadly to Reformed standards but permits local churches to decide on contested matters, a governance model that makes it difficult to point to a single “official” CREC policy on civil suffrage or household voting; descriptions of the denomination note that member churches can determine positions on disputed doctrines and practices [2] [3].
2. High‑profile CREC figures have publicly opposed women’s suffrage and proposed household voting
Doug Wilson, a co‑founder and prominent pastor within the CREC, has publicly called the 19th Amendment “a bad idea” and has said he would prefer the United States follow his church’s model, where heads of household cast votes in church elections, a position he reiterated in interviews noted by multiple outlets [1] [4]. Media reports and video excerpts circulated by outlets such as CNN and covered in reporting link Wilson and other CREC pastors to arguments that women should not have independent suffrage and that “household” or head‑of‑household voting is preferable [5] [1].
3. Visibility of these views has political and public consequences, but they are not synonymous with a denominational law
Coverage tying CREC to efforts to roll back women’s suffrage has intensified because public figures who attend CREC churches, such as Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, amplified a video of CREC pastors arguing against women’s individual voting rights, raising concern about the influence of those views beyond church pews; reporting highlights both the speech of individual pastors and the political amplification rather than documenting a denominational resolution to repeal the 19th Amendment [1] [6] [5].
4. Historical Reformed debates provide context but do not prove an official CREC stance
Arguments for household voting and opposition to women’s suffrage have antecedents in broader Reformed and conservative Protestant debates stretching back a century—some Reformed writers and denominations historically argued that men represent families in civic and ecclesial life and therefore should exercise voting authority on behalf of households—but those historical patterns illuminate intellectual roots rather than proving a current, formal CREC doctrinal mandate [7] [8] [9] [10].
5. What the reporting does and does not show: limits of available evidence
Available reporting documents that prominent CREC leaders have advocated repeal of the 19th Amendment or household voting and that local CREC congregations practice household voting in church elections in some cases, but it does not produce a published CREC-wide statement or constitutional action formally adopting household voting for civil elections or officially endorsing repeal of the 19th Amendment as the denomination’s binding policy; the network’s decentralized polity and public statements by individual pastors are the clearest documented facts [1] [4] [2] [3].
6. Competing perspectives and implicit agendas to consider
Critics frame these pastorally expressed positions as an explicit anti‑suffrage, patriarchal agenda with political implications, while defenders within the movement often present household voting as a theological and ecclesiological preference rooted in traditional gender roles and church order; news outlets and advocacy publications differ in emphasis, so readers should weigh the cited public statements (Wilson’s and others’) against the absence of a formal CREC constitutional enactment when assessing how representative these views are for the entire communion [5] [6] [1].