Letters Serving as a September Closer

When does your church make the determination that a covenant child is to be considered a head of household? Say a son is now 18 and goes to college, does he automatically become a “head of household” and allowed to cast a vote in church matters? Or does he have to “apply” for status? If it is automatic, what exactly is the condition? Would this condition be any different for daughters (minus the obvious if she marries her husband is HoH)?

Nathan

I am 60, a retired Naval Officer. I have searched for faith my whole life. The loss of Charlie Kirk has shaken what little faith I ever had. Churches unnerve me, the story of the torture and killing of Jesus fills me with dread, not hope, and I do not know what to do anymore to try and catch this elusive (to me) thing called faith.
Do you have a piece of advice I can try? Thank you.

Daniel

I am a member of the CREC church. However my family and I live in a small town about an hour away from the church. Therefore it is very hard to be part of the community there. Being involved in our town and local community is very important to us and it is very hard to support the church and maintain relationships at church logistically. We had been thinking about going to this small church in our town. However there are some value and theological differences. I am convinced that I can slowly change, grow, and improve this church. I guess my question would be should we just deal with the distance or should we try to go to the local church and pray that we are able to change it. I am convinced it can be done though it will be hard. My wife is concerned that there are no young families and no young moms her age that share her values. Going to the local church would be hard on our family yet I am convinced that our town is in need of at least one church that preaches more Reformed values and is more bold in the gospel and I am tired of waiting.
So to summarize
There is no Reformed or CREC church within an hour
I want to have one in my town and I am convinced I can change this church into one but the sacrifices my family will have to make , whether temporary or long term, may not be worth it.
What are your thoughts, advice, wisdom on these things? What should I do as the leader of my family in this predicament?
Thank you for your time,

Jeremy

I have been recently frightened by hyper-preterism which cascaded into questioning many things. After considering much of your work and others, I found partial-preterism to provide many satisfying answers to New Testament prophecy. However, a quick look at the comment section of partial-preterist work, you’ll find enough people claiming the “inconsistency” of partial-preterism. This has also been my question, why do we say not all the prophecies are fulfilled? I recently picked up Steve Gregg’s “Why Not Full-Preterism”, and found it to ease my fears of potentially falling into heresy. I did not know Gregg well enough, so I looked him up and found that he’s a “non-Calvinist” and an Annihilationist. Which made me question his conclusions in the book I am reading.
I’ve realized that I want to have all the answers before I say I believe something to be true in general. I often get frightened in comment sections because of questions posed there (whether they are good questions or not). How do I have faith without “turning my brain off” and without morbid introspection saying to me “this question frightens you because you know they have a point!” (whether or not they do have a point).

Kellen

When it comes to sharing the Gospel with our covenant children, should we teach them to believe in Jesus so that they can be saved, or should we teach them that they are saved and should therefore believe in Jesus? Since adopting covenantal thinking, I have not been sure how to get out of this roundabout.

Andrew

I’ve been reading Rushdoony on Tithing.
He divides the First Fruits and the First Born from the Tithe, as separate acts of free-will gifting. Would you also affirm that distinction?
He also divided the Tithe into three separate Tithes: the Social, Rejoicing, and Poor tithes (every third year). Would you also agree that essentially we should tithe 10% for the social, 10% for rejoicing, and every third year, an additional 10% for the poor?
I’d be interested in hearing more about this, as this concept has been foreign to me, as I previously assumed these three tithes were different parts of the overall tithe of 10%.

Josh

So my church is experiencing turmoil because our pastor has used church funds for personal use with the intent of repaying, though he took a while to repay. There are a few thousand dollars worth of things he used the church’s card for, he has paid them back in full, but there’s more purchases for medical and ministry needs that he has failed to provide receipts for. He has apologized, accepted responsibility, paid back the money and will continue to provide receipts, yet he thinks he should remain in pastoral office going forward to rebuild trust. Does his act of restitution give the church sufficient reason to receive him back and rebuild the trust, or should he be asked to leave? Am really torn on the best way to deal with this, am talking to other pastors and brothers about this, I can see both sides, but am tending towards the view that he has disqualified himself.

CO

I wanted to get your opinion on the following matter: Recently, a friendly debate arose with some members of my local church regarding whether communicants should consult with the pastor (there is only one in the congregation) about “important” decisions such as studying at a seminary, visiting fellow members from another church, etc. I was of the opinion that men, as heads of households, have a certain autonomy, and that it’s not necessary to consult with the pastor about everything and always seek his approval. For me, that exceeds his jurisdiction or authority over the sheep. What do you think?

Dante

For a long time Christians have been victims of DEI policies, vaxx policies, etc., and aggressively purged from jobs, schools, and military. Now, the pendulum is shifting and the conservatives are targeting people whose political views are amiss. These leftists are exposed and targeted and the message to the conservative public on social media is, “you know what to do” in going after these folks.
What are your thoughts on conservative cancel culture? How should a Christian respond?

Jack

Re: Clown world: Is it the drugs or the guns?
Thought you would find this report interesting. Looks like its probably the drugs.

Taylor

This is my second time writing in regard to your remarkable piece “Singleness as Affliction,” as one of the afflicted.
I find one of the most arresting lines to be your point “One of the reasons why the church is so accepting of large numbers of young people remaining single for extended periods of time is that we have signed a secret peace treaty with the porn industry.”
Eventually, this raised in my mind the question, to what extent can we also say the church has signed a secret (or not-so-secret) peace treaty with the online dating industry?
It’s been said many times, many ways, that many churches do not know what to do with or for singles. My own church’s singles ministry has reached the point that the idea of members meeting future spouses therein is essentially regarded as a happy accident. It seems at this stage, “we’re not about that.”
I myself can’t proscribe online dating for others, nor do I begrudge my married friends who successfully matched online. For myself, however, I find the prospect of using even Christian online dating very unappealing and unattractive, based on my temperament and limited experience. To quote one of my spiritual role models, “online dating ranks fairly low on the desirability scale.”
I’d value your opinion on these matters.

Jonathan

I am seeking advice on books or other resources to help me handle my wife’s recent going to be with the Lord after almost two-and-a-half years of cancer.
For reference, she was 42, I am 41 and we have two children aged 8 and 16.
It seems that when I look online for information that typing the word “widower” brings mostly dating websites and this is not what I am looking for. Other information revolves around handling grief itself but there is very little advice, it is more the generic “whatever you are doing is right, everybody is different sort of deal.
The advice I am seeking is more practical in nature. Things like:
-How do I continue to honour my wife without turning my house into a shrine of idolatry? What do I do with her things?
-Should I be trying fill the role of both parents (soft virtues of my wife included) or is it just a reality that the kids have a void in that area now? Do I seek out a female mentor (at least for my daughter who is 8) to help her with the things I don’t understand?
That leads to the uncomfortable topic of female company. I really feel the need for it in a way that I had not done before. It’s not sexual in nature, the female company I am seeking is not buxom beauties or anything that I find attractive, I think I just miss having a woman around but I know the reality of when men find a “platonic friend” that it is unlikely to stay platonic, or at least his thoughts will drift and it would be unwise to put myself in such a position only a few months after my wife passed.
My wife’s friend came with us to the zoo with the kids the other day and we bought a family ticket and were later (understandably) mistaken for a family while at the zoo. There is nothing remotely romantic about my relationship with my wife’s friend but between the family ticket and being mistaken for a family unit, I have felt tremendous guilt and I can’t work out if I feel like I cheated on my wife or if I feel guilty that I still get to take the kids out for fun and watch them grow up.
It’s these type of things that I need guidance on and I don’t know where to go. I don’t know of any men who have lost their wives at this stage in their life and I feel lost.

Dave

I came across your profile in the Wall Street Journal and was both intrigued and honestly a little surprised. By way of background, I’m a 26-year-old Muslim, born and raised here in the U.S.
To start off, I think it’s only fair to say that if someone is going to critique your vision of America as a “Christian Republic,” they’d also have to be consistent in critiquing an “Islamic Republic.” A lot of Muslims today have been secularized, but if your words were reframed in Islamic terms, I can already imagine many Muslims pushing back in the same way.
On the point about “Muslims being barred from the public square,” I’d argue that this is already happening in practice, though indirectly. As a practicing Muslim, I honestly can’t claim any of the Muslims currently in office as true representatives of my faith. That makes me wonder: wouldn’t it be more accurate to say that Islam itself is what you’d like to see barred, rather than Muslims as individuals? And would that logic extend to other groups—say, Jews or American-Israeli dual citizens?
I also wasn’t especially troubled by your statement in the WSJ article about wanting the authority of Jesus Christ to be present “every day of the week, everywhere we go.” As a Muslim, I’d say the same thing about Islam. In fact, it made me wonder: what’s the real difference between what you’re saying and what a Muslim would mean by living under sharia?
Another part that caught my attention was the mention of Peter Thiel being described as a “devout Christian” while also being openly married to a man. I couldn’t help but wonder how you view that in light of your broader vision of public Christianity.
My bigger question is about the U.S. itself. From everything I learned in school, it seems obvious that this country was founded on secular liberal principles by men who were mostly Deists—or at the very least, secular-minded Christians. Even if they were Christian, they were not exactly writing a religious state into the Constitution. The document itself makes that clear, especially with the clause against religious tests for office. To call the Constitution Christian feels, at best, like revisionism. That said, I agree it’s not sacred—it can be changed through the proper process. But until that happens, the text is pretty straightforward.
To be fair, I actually think your vision has been misrepresented in some of the pushback. In some ways, it reminds me of the Islamic societies of the Middle Ages, where Muslims held control of the public sphere, but Christians and Jews still had room for private practice and economic life. In your view of a Christian Republic, would Muslims have that same kind of private space to live their faith?
On immigration, I’ll be honest—I agree with you to an extent. No Muslim society would ever open the floodgates to people of other religions. But in America’s case, the history is what it is. Religious freedom was enshrined when my ancestors made the decision to immigrate, and generations of non-Christians—including Muslims—have paid taxes, contributed to Social Security, Medicare, and so on. It feels unfair to change the rules midway. Personally, I’d even be open to the idea of a voluntary return program to Muslim lands if it came a fair economic settlement and with the guarantee that America wouldn’t interfere there.
So overall, I’d say I’m both intrigued and somewhat optimistic about what you’re proposing. I do think it’s a stretch to argue that the Founders wanted religion to dominate the public sphere, but I can see that your position is more thoughtful than the caricature your critics present.
I support you in your opposition to secularism, and many modern Muslims share your views on that. The removal of God from the public sphere is an attack on every religion. If I were Christian, I would feel safe living in a parallel Muslims society to the one you describe. I would be interested to learn how Muslims would be treated under your version of a Christian-Sharia based society.
Would love to hear your thoughts.
Best,

IbnTexas

I have been wrestling with the concepts of your book “Standing on the promises” for some time now. This week I have found myself preparing a sermon that dips into the question of the promise of Christian kids for Christian parents, and I have found myself at a crossroads. I love the conclusion of your book and the foundation that it has on the promises of God found in Scripture. I can see from afar the evidence that this approach of works from an overflow of faith, trusting in the promises, has worked in your family. As far as I can tell, your siblings all love the Lord, your kids all love the Lord, and your grandkids all love the Lord. Either there is something to this, or you need to start bottling the water from the taps in your houses and selling it. But, the question for me comes to this. Have you ever sat across from parents in your church who truly sought to raise their kids by faith, just as you did yours, in humility and trust of the Lord who still lost their kids? What did you say to them? It seems to me that the only answer is “not enough faith”, but now I sound like a prosperity heretic. Any insight you can give into such a situation would be much appreciated. Thanks.

David

I’m confused about some of the cheering on of Erika Kirk. On the one hand, I want to support her and be behind her as a friend in a time of need. She’s a widow. She has orphans to care for—James 1:27, etc. Love, support, and encouragement are great. On the other, it seems antithetical to Charlie’s view of women (and, I thought, ours) to put her in his position as the direct heir and figurehead of his ministry. He was a fighter, in the arena. Yes, the left brought the fight to her, but this isn’t like a home invasion where I want my wife to put the baby down and shoot the bad guy if I’ve been cut down. This seems more like my wife taking my spot as a Navy SEAL after I’m cut down in the field. Other men should stand in, not cheer her on taking on a battlefield mission. Deborah comes to mind as a counter, but my understanding was that it was a failure on the part of men that led to that, not that it was normative.
Am I reading this incorrectly? Isn’t she talking about leading his organization and taking over his speaking engagements? Is she not going to continue to do his work?
Where’s the distinction in all of this?
Thank you.

Jake