What's the best English version of the Heidelberg Catechism? In the back of the blue Psalter Hymnal? CanRC version?

I'd like to memorize something that is pretty faithful to the original.

__________________
Bryan Peters
Providence Reformed Church (URCNA)
Des Moines, Iowa

Doctrinal truth should be preached always, openly, without compromise, and never dissembled or concealed. There is no offence in it; it is the staff of uprightness.
~Martin Luther~

There is more than one???? I have one in a red paperback....

__________________
Jon Lake
Whitehouse,Texas/ Member: Good Shepherd (REC)

The URCNA, having 'come out' of the CRC, offers the 1975 CRC translation on their website:

United Reformed Churches, click on 'Heidelberg Catechism' on the left.

__________________
BJ Mora
Grace OPC, Modesto, CA
Reformed & Presbyterian Churches & Denominations in North America

Since you are in the RCUS, use the version our denom uses (whether contemporary or traditional language). This is a slightly edited version of the 300-year anniversary translation by Schaff, et al, based on the German text.

The translation of the Christian Reformed Church of 1976 is a to be shunned. Lord willing, the URCNA will get back to the received English text as found in the 1959 Psalter Hymnal, and before that, in earlier Psalters.

__________________
Rev. Daniel R. Hyde
Pastor, Oceanside United Reformed Church, Carlsbad/Oceanside, California
Th.M. candidate, Puritan Reformed Theological Seminary

Naturally I'm partial to the CanRC version. I believe that we have a good edition, though I do think the 1976 PH version is better in a few places.

I'm hoping that the CanRC and URC Liturgical Forms and Confessions committees might be able to work together to produce the best possible edition for the 21st century.

__________________
Wes Bredenhof
Pastor, Providence Canadian Reformed Church
Hamilton, Ontario
www.bredenhof.ca
Gospel Talk Radio Program

Don't count on it, Wes. Our committee does not want to re-translate since there are already good translations out there. Have you read Lyle Bierma's articles on the '76 edition? He has shown that it has many problems, and in fact, in places even changes the theology.

Yes, I've read the Bierma articles and I'm aware of the problems.

I'm not advocating for a "re-translation," but a new edition that combines the strengths and mitigates (or eliminates) the weaknesses of existing ones.

My wife and I have actually just moved and are looking to move our membership to a URC here in Des Moines. Rev. Hyde, would you still recommend using the RCUS version of the Schaff translation? I may eventually pursue ordination in the URCNA (Lord willing).

What are some of the differences, especially with the 1976 CRC translation?