New: Mini Psalter 2.0

What I find in my mailbox at work is rarely delightful but I was delighted to get the mail today. The good folks at Crown and Covenant sent me a copy of their Mini Psalter 2.0. It’s personalized. It’s well bound. Best of all it’s Christ’s songbook, i.e., the hymnal from which our Lord himself sang and the songbook he gave to his church by the inspiration of the Spirit. There are no theological errors. It testifies to Christ. It’s sufficient for every liturgical need. It is the voice of Christ’s pilgrim people.

This is the Book of Psalms for Worship, or the blue RPCNA Psalter. It would be ideal for use at home but you can easily take it with you on vacation and to church (an old and honored practice).

    Post authored by:

  • R. Scott Clark
    Author Image

    R.Scott Clark is the President of the Heidelberg Reformation Association, the author and editor of, and contributor to several books and the author of many articles. He has taught church history and historical theology since 1997 at Westminster Seminary California. He has also taught at Wheaton College, Reformed Theological Seminary, and Concordia University. He has hosted the Heidelblog since 2007.

    More by R. Scott Clark ›

Subscribe to the Heidelblog today!


6 comments

    • Good question but I’m not qualified to answer. I like them both. Have used them both. Perhaps there are more contemporary tunes for the Psalms in Sing Psalms but I’m not certain of that. They both seem like good work. I’m grateful that we have so many wonderful resources from which to choose.

  1. I prefer the 1650 metrical Psalms. My last church (before I moved out of state) used Crown and Covenant’s Books of Psalms for Worship for mixing Psalms with hymns. I still alternate it with the 1650 metrical Psalms in private worship, but I prefer a rhyming Psalter and many of them don’t rhyme in the new one. I also like that nearly all the Psalms in the 1650 Psalter are set to Common Metre; there is no consistency to the new, so the choice of tunes is more limited.
    But obviously it’s a good translation.

Comments are closed.