Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s ties to a conservative evangelical network have drawn renewed attention since his January 2025 confirmation. Hegseth is a member of the Communion of Reformed Evangelical Churches (CREC), an international network of more than 160 congregations that traces some of its theological roots to 20th‑century Christian Reconstructionist ideas. Many CREC leaders interpret those traditions as advocating for the application of biblical law in public life and a vision of government shaped by Christian, patriarchal authority.
Hegseth’s public use of explicitly religious language and prayers while serving as secretary of defense has prompted questions about how his faith informs policy. At a March 25, 2026 prayer service held during the war with Iran, he prayed, “Let every round find its mark against the enemies of righteousness and our great nation,” and later called for “unbreakable unity, and overwhelming violence of action against those who deserve no mercy.” Such language, together with other invocations linking military action to religious purpose, has heightened scrutiny about blending theological commitments with military decision‑making.
What is the CREC?
The CREC is a decentralized association of churches that emphasizes a Reformed theological identity and resists religious pluralism and cultural accommodation. It was co‑founded in 1993 and has grown through church planting rather than a centralized ordination system: local church founders typically receive doctrinal resources and oversight from the network while retaining a degree of local autonomy. That model has allowed the CREC to expand across North America and into Europe, Asia and South America even as it remains smaller and less widely known than larger evangelical denominations.
Doug Wilson and Christ Church, Moscow
The CREC is most closely associated with Doug Wilson, the founder and pastor of Christ Church in Moscow, Idaho, which functions as a flagship congregation. Wilson co‑founded the network and remains its most prominent voice. Christ Church has spawned institutions that promote its worldview—Logos Schools (a chain of private schools and curricula), Canon Press (a publishing and media operation) and New Saint Andrews College. Those institutions advance a cultural and educational program that positions Christian identity as distinct from and opposed to secular culture: Wilson has spoken openly of efforts to make his city a more explicitly Christian community.
Wilson’s teachings and Christ Church’s culture emphasize male headship and traditional gender roles. Within the CREC, many congregations adhere to strongly patriarchal interpretations of Scripture, and some leaders have argued that the U.S. constitutional establishment clause should not be read to require a strict separation of church and state. In practice, that has translated into a belief among some that government ought to be led by Christians and that Christian convictions should shape public policy.
Wilson’s engagement with the Pentagon
Although Wilson has not been Hegseth’s personal pastor, he has influence in CREC circles and the two men have publicly expressed mutual approval. In February 2026, Hegseth invited Wilson to lead a prayer meeting at the Pentagon. There, Wilson told assembled service members that if they “bear the name of Jesus Christ, there is no armor greater than that,” linking spiritual identity to military protection and characterizing adversaries in spiritual terms. Such remarks tie religious identity closely to the legitimacy and mission of the armed forces and illustrate the theological framing that some observers worry could shape policy rhetoric.
Controversies surrounding Wilson and the CREC
Both Wilson and the broader CREC have been involved in longstanding controversies. In 1996 Wilson published passages that many read as defending slavery or asserting that it cultivated positive racial relations, statements that have continued to generate criticism. In addition, multiple outlets have reported allegations of sexual abuse and criticized how some congregations handled those claims; accounts from women have described environments in which abuse, including within marriage, was tolerated or minimized. Wilson has denied wrongdoing and has said abuse allegations should be reported to appropriate authorities.
Hegseth’s policy moves and public actions
Elements of Hegseth’s tenure at the Defense Department have intensified focus on his religious affiliations. In May and June 2025, actions taken under his authority included a ban on transgender people serving in the military and the removal of Harvey Milk’s name from a Navy vessel. Those measures drew attention given CREC views on gender and sexuality and fueled debate about whether his faith commitments informed policy choices affecting LGBTQ service members.
Religious framing of foreign policy and military action
Hegseth frequently frames national security matters in overtly religious terms. In a March 5, 2026 speech to leaders from South and Central America, he framed interventions such as actions toward Venezuela, the blockade of Cuba and maritime operations in terms of a shared Christian identity, describing “Western nations” as “Christian nations under God” with common heritage and laws. Since the bombing campaign against Iran began on Feb. 28, his rhetoric has invoked language reminiscent of medieval crusading. He sports tattoos including “Deus Vult” (Latin for “God wills it”), an Arabic term often used to mean “infidel,” and a Jerusalem cross, and he authored a book titled American Crusade. He has characterized adversaries as “religious fanatics” who seek nuclear weapons for apocalyptic ends.
Broader implications
Hegseth’s affiliation with the CREC and his recurrent use of religious imagery suggest a melding of theological convictions and military policy that raises questions about pluralism, the appropriate role of religion in government, and the status of religious and minority groups both domestically and abroad. Critics worry that framing conflicts in explicitly religious terms can justify harsher tactics, reduce space for dissenting beliefs within the armed forces, and erode the constitutional principle of religious neutrality in state institutions.
As long as Hegseth remains in his post, analysts and advocates will continue to examine how his faith network’s doctrines and his own religious language influence operational choices and public messaging about war and national security.
