An important inspiration for the CHU was Guillaume Groen van Prinsterer (1801-1876),[3] who coined the terms 'anti-revolutionary' and 'Christian-historical'.

[5] Unlike previous anti-revolutionary politicians such as Groen van Prinsterer, Kuyper was convinced God's will could be translated to politics.

Many anti-revolutionary parliamentarians valued their independence from their electorate, leading to the formation of two distinct factions within the parliamentary group.

[6] The direct cause of a break was a proposal in 1892 by liberal minister Johannes Tak van Poortvliet to expand the suffrage.

While Kuyper supported this, conservative parliamentarians led by Alexander de Savornin Lohman opposed it.

After the 1894 election, they formed their own parliamentary group, mostly comprising members with an aristocratic background and who had not followed Kuyper in the Dutch Reformed Church split.

Its main goal was to implement a constitutional reform combining both male universal suffrage and equal payment for religious schools.

In the 1918 elections, in which male universal suffrage and proportional representation were used for the first time, the party lost three seats.

The cabinet of Ruys de Beerenbrouck continued to govern; the CHU supplied two ministers and one non-partisan CHU-sympathiser is appointed.

During the 1930s, a group of the party's younger members, including Piet Lieftinck began to develop support for state intervention in the economy and form a Christian basis for this intervention on basis of the work of the theologian Karl Barth.

During World War II, De Geer's position became less tenable, as he attempted to negotiate a peace with the Germans against the will of the government.

After the Second World War, prominent CHU politicians wanted to end the pillarisation of Dutch politics.

Some wanted to unite the CHU with the ARP, others, like Piet Lieftinck, joined the new social democratic Labour Party (PvdA).

After the 1959 election (in which the party lost one seat), the De Quay cabinet is formed by KVP, ARP, CHU and VVD.

The CHU lost one seat but still supplied two ministers in the new KVP-ARP-CHU-VVD coalition De Jong cabinet.

Furthermore, CHU was blocked from the newly formed cabinet by the PvdA and its allies, which cooperated with the KVP and ARP.

Meanwhile, a process of merger had started between the KVP, ARP and CHU, under pressure of poor election results.

Although there are some prominent CDA politicians with a background in the CHU, the better organised KVP and ARP are far stronger currents within the party.

The label conservative was already taken by a parliamentary group of monarchists and colonialists, who fell from favour during the late 19th century.

The CHU lacked a coherent political ideology as it was formed by politicians who emphasised their own independent position.

Furthermore, many times it served as the counterpart of the ARP: Generally the political course of the party can be seen as (soft) conservative and Christian democratic.

The more socially oriented MP's were: Johan Reinhardt Snoeck Henkemans (1862–1945), Jan Rudolph Slotemaker de Bruïne (1869–1941), Frida Katz (1885–1963), Jouke Bakker (1873–1956), Piet Lieftinck (1902–1989), Henk Kikkert (1912–1988), Cor van Mastrigt (1909–1997), jkvr.

Bob Wttewaall van Stoetwegen, long-time member of parliament after the Second World War and befriended with the queen, was considered reasonably progressive on social issues (decolonisation of the Dutch Indies, women emancipation, housing, prison reforms, welfare), as was her colleague, the unionist, Henk Kikkert (welfare, housing).

The CHU had a separate party organisation for women, Centrale van Christelijk Historische Vrouwengroepen.