Heidelberg Catechism suggestions?

[philomath]

Does anyone have suggestions on a good physical copy of The Heidelberg Catechism? I've been planning to get a pocket-sized one for a while, but they seem to be out of stock at the places I've typically seen them (Banner of Truth, RHB). I have been reading it from an app on my phone, but I would like to get a physical one at some point.

I appreciate any suggestions. Thanks!

 

[SavedSinner]

RCUS Ref Church US (from German Reformed) and get theirs which is the best translation and easiest to memorize. CRC went to bullet points like AI which NO ONE can memorise, as prose is easier. They also did the Ursinus commentary
[automerge]1776740768[/automerge]
and unlike modern Engl Bible translators, the RCUS specifically tried to use Anglo Saxon words in the catechism as much as possible, and it has a beautiful logical flow that you could almost sing. OP/URC Trinity Hymnal and Psalter people could have learned so much from the RCUS people. They want people to learn the words in their hearts VS the new way of cut and replace that shows up so much in the Trinity which is less singable and harder to memorise, esp since their kids have to memorise the catechism (so they really know how to do it) and for you much easier to read and or memorise

 

[py3ak]

I think this is the best standalone edition of the Heidelberg Catechism currently available:

https://a.co/d/0fgAD9Fp

It is closer to the 4th edition Heidelberger that was the definitive text in the lifetime of the originators in several ways. For one, it follows the original division into Lord's Days (from the 3rd edition), rather than the Synod of Dort's mild reworking thereof; the translation philosophy gets you somewhat closer to the original in some important ways than the CRC editions; and the textual criticism and translation work done for the fine Tercentenary edition were rechecked and slightly improved.

 

[EvanF]

OP/URC Trinity Hymnal and Psalter people could have learned so much from the RCUS people. They want people to learn the words in their hearts VS the new way of cut and replace that shows up so much in the Trinity which is less singable and harder to memorise, esp since their kids have to memorise the catechism (so they really know how to do it) and for you much easier to read and or memorise

The Trinity Hymnal and Trinity Psalter are the older OPC and later OPC/PCA publications. The Psalter Hymnal is the older URC hymnal. The Trinity-Psalter Hymnal is the new OPC/URC publication, combining the names of the Trinity Hymnal and Psalter Hymnal.

Are you talking about the Trinity-Psalter Hymnal?

 

[Theoretical]

The Trinity Hymnal and Trinity Psalter are the older OPC and later OPC/PCA publications. The Psalter Hymnal is the older URC hymnal. The Trinity-Psalter Hymnal is the new OPC/URC publication, combining the names of the Trinity Hymnal and Psalter Hymnal.

Are you talking about the Trinity-Psalter Hymnal?

I think he’s talking about the differences between the CRC’s Heidelberg Catechism that’s used in the Trinity Psalter Hymnal and the RCUS’s version of the Heidelberg Catechism.

 

[darrellmaurina]

The Trinity Hymnal and Trinity Psalter are the older OPC and later OPC/PCA publications. The Psalter Hymnal is the older URC hymnal. The Trinity-Psalter Hymnal is the new OPC/URC publication, combining the names of the Trinity Hymnal and Psalter Hymnal.

Are you talking about the Trinity-Psalter Hymnal?

I think he’s talking about the differences between the CRC’s Heidelberg Catechism that’s used in the Trinity Psalter Hymnal and the RCUS’s version of the Heidelberg Catechism.

@EvanF : The comment by @Theoretical is likely correct. @SavedSinner and @py3ak will need to speak for themselves on what they meant, but there are significant differences in the English translations of the Heidelberg Catechism used in the German Reformed and Dutch Reformed traditions. The current CRC translation is even more problematic. I studied under some of the translators, I know their translation philosophy (and also their views which went into the NIV) and the best thing to say is this: Steer clear.

The original poster @philomath is a Reformed Baptist in the SBC. These aren't issues with the Westminster Confession or its two derivative documents, the 1658 Savoy Declaration and the 1689 Second London Baptist Confession, since all were written in English. A lot of people in the United States and Britian take for granted that the English text in front of us, while it may use KJV/Shakespearean old-fashioned language, is what the original authors intended.

That can't be said for the other non-British confessions and catechisms, which were typically either written in Latin or in the vernacular language of the country of origin. That can create significant issues with translations -- not so much on content but on readability, ease of memorizing, and sometimes on nuances of meaning and interpretation.

For those of us who care deeply about our choice of Bible translation, we should also care about the translation philosophy underlying the catechism we expect our children to memorize.

 

[CasualWestminsterEnjoyer]

The ORIGINAL Dutch Heidelberg catechism included some intentional changes from the Latin one, because it was meant to be reflection of the doctrine of the Dutch church, and not just a straightforward rendering of the Palatine Catechism. In particular, the Dutch catechism took out the holy days from q. 103. That change persists today.
(Latin: festis diebus. Current CRC catechism: the festive day of rest)
It is an open question, I think, whether it is more desirable to have a version that corresponds exactly to what Ursinus wrote in 1563, or which reflects what the church believes and confesses in one's own day (assuming those differ in some way).
[automerge]1776830672[/automerge]
Of course, ironically, the Dutch church today, unlike the one that translated and adopted the Heidelberg Catechism back then, does fully embrace evangelical holy days.