6 comments

1. It is finally here, so exciting! Thank you, Dr. Clark!

   Reply ↓

2. The commentary is on sale right now at WTS Books for $39.99.

   Reply ↓

3. Dr. Clark, this is a magnificent achievement. This Presbyterian REALLY appreciates the labor of love, and will feast on this for years. One particular passage I love to use in worship is Q32 “But why are you called a Christian?” After reading your edifying commentary on it, I wondered about a textual matter.

   The Westminster Seminary Press collection of Reformed standards (2023, eds. Lillback & Aubert) uses a version of the HC published by the Canadian Reformed Churches (2008). That answer to Q32 says:

   “Because I am a member of Christ by faith and thus share in his anointing, so that I may as prophet confess his Name, as priest present myself a living sacrifice of thankfulness to him, and as king fight with a free and good conscience against sin and the devil in this life, and hereafter reign with him eternally over all creatures.”

   In the Introduction, you say you are using a modified English translation “from the Tercentenary translation published by the Reformed Church in the United States in 1863. … [which] follows the third German edition (1863) closely…”

   Two questions about this (and sorry if you address any of this in the discussion with Kevin DeYoung, which I haven’t heard yet):

   (1) The Q32 answer in your version does not contain the specific references “as prophet… as priest… as king.” I take it that difference is more than a translation issue, but reflects the use of different underlying texts.

   Could you shed additional light on that difference? Do you have a fundamental problem with the Canadian Reformed Churches version on Q32? Personally, and despite the risks of conflating the work of Christ vs. the believer’s participation in that work, I really like the specific reference to the 3 offices as applied to believers. But I also want to be sensitive to the best available textual bases.

   (2) More generally, is the English version you are using the one adopted by the URCNA? If not, what accounts for the difference?

   Thanks again.

   Reply ↓

   • Rob,

     Thanks for the encouragement.

     I modified the 1978 RCUS modern language edition according to the German and Latin texts. The RCUS follows the German text more closely than others. The history of English translation in the Dutch churches seems to be that they relied more on Dutch and Latin sources. To translate from Dutch to English is to translate from a translation. Of course that’s true of the Latin but it has ecclesiastical status, since both the Palatinate schools (and many other places) used it and perhaps more importantly, the Synod of Dort commissioned a Latin translation. I don’t know the history of the CanRef translations so I may not say much except to wonder if their version only makes explicit what is implicit?

     In this question, the translation I give follows closely the German and Latin texts, which are given in a footnote in the commentary. The translation I give is very close also to that published in the 1959 CRCNA Psalter Hymnal.

     Reply ↓

4. Bought from Baker last week. Got it Monday. Very much enjoying it. Thank you for this, Dr. Clark.

   Reply ↓

   • You’re welcome.

     Thanks for reading!

     Reply ↓

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.