As for the hard edges of the Heidelberg, there is the notorious question and answer 80, which calls the “popish mass” an “accursed idolatry.” (I think the Christian Reformed Church has bracketed this phrase or put it in a footnote.)

I am surprised that Moody Publishers (I assume this is the same as the old Moody Press) would publish something on the Heidelberg, given the dispensational orientation of Moody Bible Institute. My parents attended MBI nearly six decades ago. Perhaps it’s moved towards the magisterial Reformation since then?

The most obvious contrast is that Heidelberg’s intentionally irenic (toward the Lutherans), whereas Dort is intentionally polemical (against the Arminians). Westminster’s more scholastic and objective, whereas Heidelberg is all about application. I don’t know the Belgic well enough to make any generalizations. The general rule is that the Heidelberg Catechism stands out among the Reformed confessions as especially sweet, pastoral, practical, and affective. Not to say it goes light on the hard edges of doctrine!

There have been interesting schools of interpretation of the Heidelberg Catechism. It was considered a crucial text by Karl Barth and by the Mercersburg theology, but for nearly opposite reasons. And the Dutch Reformed have organized the entire preaching and teaching year around it.

Thanks for the DeYoung book promo; it’ll be good to have a good introductory recommendation of the Heidelberg in print.

Fred

I might throw in something like Sirach just to stir things up. :)