Waiting for Magyar – UPDATE!

In these five short years, vatican.va has already managed to post Summorum Pontificum in Latin and Hungarian!

But wait!  vatican.va still has nothing on the Holy Father’s Letter to German-speaking bishops about the translation of “pro multis“!

Could we at least have the Holy Father’s “pro multis” letter in Hungarian?

Pretty please?

The language of the Magyars is apparently cutting edge for the people who control vatican.va when it comes to our Benedict XVI’s liturgical documents and writings.

UPDATE 27 April 1857 GMT:

At last, the letter is now available in German on the vatican.va site.  HERE.

Now we really need to get it disseminated by having it also in Hungarian!

UPDATE 7 May 2149 GMT:

You won’t believe this by ENGLISH is now available!

FacebookEmailPinterestGoogle GmailShare/Bookmark

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, Brick by Brick, Lighter fare, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000, SUMMORUM PONTIFICUM and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

24 Responses to Waiting for Magyar – UPDATE!

  1. James Joseph says:

    I, too, swear by the notion that there is a translation mafia.

  2. Andrew says:

    Talán lehetne találni egy magyar embert aki ilyesmiket németb?l angolra hajlandó lenne lefordítani.

  3. I think it would be best if a third party could obtain the official text and post it. Everybody loves technology …. until it involves financing a competent staff.

  4. anilwang says:

    I’m not sure exactly what’s up with vatican.va , but if the New Evangelization is to be taken seriously, fixing vatican.va, its organization, and it’s update process has to have a high priority. Granted there are several other web sites that take up the slack and actually post a good number of documents that should be on vatican.va but aren’t. Thank goodness for the laity, and faithful priests and bishops who work to preserve and protect the faith despite vatican.va.

    But ultimately, those sites are unofficial. If you want to point a potential convert or even a priest or bishop to one of those sites, you will have no more credibility than a CINO “theologian” or anti-catholic or a CINO advocate “that does really good work for the poor so he must live *the true gospel* and must know his/her stuff”.

    I don’t know the specific technology used on vatican.va, but superficially it appears to be plain HTML pages. If every page is a hand coded HTML page, then it’s no surprise that it takes so long to have documents up on vatican.va or what there are so many errors. To put it bluntly, the techies are the bottleneck and a central point of failure.

    There are far better technologies out there which give non-technicians the ability to add posts. Many even include a review process, so errors can be caught before publication, and per page feedback (which need not be publicized) so that viewers of the page can let the authors know that there are errors.

  5. ContraMundum says:

    This was part of the deal Gregory the Great cut with Atilla.

  6. BaedaBenedictus says:

    Hold off on Magyar. I think it’s needed to be in German first:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7P9qrQpEBu0&feature=youtu.be

  7. Hidden One says:

    I believe that the Hungarian translation is up because the Hungarian bishops’ conference supplied it.

  8. ContraMundum says:

    I’m not sure exactly what’s up with vatican.va , but if the New Evangelization is to be taken seriously, fixing vatican.va, its organization, and it’s update process has to have a high priority.

    This sounds to me like the kind of thing a religious order would have done in the past. In the past they’ve “done” teaching, among other things; in the future, might they “do” information technology?

    I’m sure lay groups like the Knights of Columbus would be willing to do this, but somehow a religious order would seem to be a longer-lasting solution.

  9. Inigo says:

    Hiába érhet? el magyarul a Summorum Pontificum, sem a papok sem a püspökök nem olvassák, vagy ha mégis, akkor is maximum legyintenek. Tartok t?le, hogy a német levélnek is hasonló lesz a sorsa, függetlenül attól, hogy milyen nyelven rakják fel a honlapra…

  10. Inigo: Szomorú, de igaz!

  11. dans0622 says:

    They’ve got the English now…

  12. JARay says:

    If you want to access the Divine Office at http://www.divinumofficium.com you will find that you are offered it in Latin, Hungarian and English. I have opted for the Latin/English version.

  13. discerningguy says:

    :O And still NO SUMMORUM PONTIFICUM!

  14. If the Vatican web site is mostly plain, hand-coded HTML, that is actually commendable. That would make the site reliable and accessible via any browser, especially those like mine with Javascript deliberately disabled. Most web sites today annoy me with slow graphics and dangerous scripts, which are unsustainable in the long run.

  15. Fr. Frank says:

    I once heard a friend say that observing the Vatican’s bureaucratic machinery trying to get things done in a timely way is a great deal like watching a very grand and stately old lady progressing down a boulevard suddenly stop and attempt a cartwheel.

  16. digdigby says:

    I think I will learn Hungarian. The Eurocrats are soiling themselves as Hungary declares its freedom from the New Soviet Eurostate’. “Christian nation? St. Stephen? Family the sacred unit of the nation? Fetal Rights???? Am I dreaming?
    http://www.kormany.hu/download/4/c3/30000/THE%20FUNDAMENTAL%20LAW%20OF%20HUNGARY.pdf

  17. Dismas says:

    [29] Now thou dost dismiss thy servant, O Lord, according to thy word in peace; [30] Because my eyes have seen thy salvation, [31] Which thou hast prepared before the face of all peoples: [32] A light to the revelation of the Gentiles, and the glory of thy people Israel. [Luke 2:29-31] …

  18. off2 says:

    Assuming the English translation is good – am blown away by how well and simply and clearly His Holiness explains a rather complex issue.

  19. Supertradmum says:

    Arabic would be a good idea.

  20. Maltese says:

    Summorum Pontificum-English

    I wonder if this blog may have played a part?

  21. Andrew says:

    Here’s a related curiosity: The Latin text of Pope John Paul II’s Encyclical “Ecclesia de Eucharistia” no. 2 reads on the internet as follows:
    “… qui pro vobis funditur et pro omnibus in remissionem peccatorum” (vatican . va)
    “Pro omnibus”? The official text as published in the Acta Apostolicae Sedis is different: it reads “pro multis”. Shoudn’t someone correct the internet text? How did this happen, anyway?

  22. SonofMonica says:

    Maltese: that strikes me as a letter about Summorum Pontificum, but not the Motu Proprio itself. And just taking the letter by itself, it’s little wonder some bishops aren’t implementing SP. The letter focuses in part on nothing taking away the authority of the bishops, and I’m sure some bishops saw that opportunity as their out.

  23. wmeyer says:

    Maltese, that is the letter about Summorum Pontificum, not the document itself. As far as I can tell, the actual document is still not to be found on the Vatican site in English. Moreover, the link on Wikipedia to the English version of the document and the letter in their own documents is dead, probably due to reorganization of their site.