P
Phillip_Rolfes
Guest
The typos are unfortunate, and I hope that a revised edition which corrects these mistakes is released at some point. The icons could’ve been done in a higher resolution. As it is, it looks like a very pixilated scanned image. Again, I’d hope that this would be corrected in a revised edition. The leather cover on my book is just fine.I owned this one already and sold it to a bookstore. There’s quite a few typos in this one, which is disappointing. Some of the icons look like poor quality clip art. The cover is way too stiff even to be bonded leather.
The thing that I really like about the book is the translation of the prayers. Despite the few typos, the translation is dignified and very readable/prayable. I’m torn with the whole modern vs. Elizabethan English thing. For private prayer I prefer modern English hands down. When in private I prefer to speak to God in the same language with which I’d speak to my spouse and children. To me that just feels more intimate. But that’s a subjective preference. Liturgically I think reasonable arguments can be made for both Elizabethan and modern English. Elizabethan English, on a subjective level, sounds more dignified. I would argue that when it comes to the public worship of the Church using a language that is understandable, but is not the “street language” would be preferable. That being said, certain Churches have committees that meet regularly to update translations into the modern idiom so that the translations are accurate, but still up to date. I’ve read that the Romanian Orthodox Church is one such Church. I’m just glad that I’m not the one left with the decision because to me there are an equal number of pros and cons with both Elizabethan and modern English.