Pope to English & Welsh Bishops: Look to Newman

In this morning's Bolletino we have the Holy Father's address to the Bishops of England and Wales. (The Scots have their own episcopal conference, and the whole of Ireland has a single hierarchy, in case you were wondering.) Damian Thompson has his own take on what the Pope had to say. (Little praise, plenty of coded warnings.) However, I prefer to focus on what the Pope says about Newman:

Make it your concern, then, to draw on the considerable gifts of the lay faithful in England and Wales and see that they are equipped to hand on the faith to new generations comprehensively, accurately, and with a keen awareness that in so doing they are playing their part in the Church’s mission. In a social milieu that encourages the expression of a variety of opinions on every question that arises, it is important to recognize dissent for what it is, and not to mistake it for a mature contribution to a balanced and wide-ranging debate. It is the truth revealed through Scripture and Tradition and articulated by the Church’s Magisterium that sets us free. Cardinal Newman realized this, and he left us an outstanding example of faithfulness to revealed truth by following that "kindly light" wherever it led him, even at considerable personal cost. Great writers and communicators of his stature and integrity are needed in the Church today, and it is my hope that devotion to him will inspire many to follow in his footsteps.
Much attention has rightly been given to Newman’s scholarship and to his extensive writings, but it is important to remember that he saw himself first and foremost as a priest. In this Annus Sacerdotalis, I urge you to hold up to your priests his example of dedication to prayer, pastoral sensitivity towards the needs of his flock, and passion for preaching the Gospel. You yourselves should set a similar example. Be close to your priests, and rekindle their sense of the enormous privilege and joy of standing among the people of God as alter Christus. In Newman’s words, "Christ’s priests have no priesthood but His … what they do, He does; when they baptize, He is baptizing; when they bless, He is blessing" (Parochial and Plain Sermons, VI 242). Indeed, since the priest plays an irreplaceable role in the life of the Church, spare no effort in encouraging priestly vocations and emphasizing to the faithful the true meaning and necessity of the priesthood. Encourage the lay faithful to express their appreciation of the priests who serve them, and to recognize the difficulties they sometimes face on account of their declining numbers and increasing pressures. The support and understanding of the faithful is particularly necessary when parishes have to be merged or Mass times adjusted. Help them to avoid any temptation to view the clergy as mere functionaries but rather to rejoice in the gift of priestly ministry, a gift that can never be taken for granted.

Gandalf?

Interesting... Pentecost Indoors...

From the Bolletino:

L’11 maggio 2008, Domenica di Pentecoste, alle ore 10, il Santo Padre Benedetto XVI celebrerà nella Basilica Vaticana la Santa Messa della Solennità.
Alla Celebrazione sono invitati i fedeli della diocesi di Roma e i pellegrini presenti in città.

It seems as though this year's Pentecost Sunday Mass will be celebrated by the Holy Father inside St Peter's rather than in the Square as has been done in previous years.
I'm not one of those people who think that the Holy Father should never celebrate Mass in St Peter's Square, but I do think that it is fitting that St Peter's itself be used more often for Papal Masses.

Caritas in Veritate

Reports have been circulating that the Holy Father's next encyclical will be entitled Caritas in Veritate and it's supposed to deal with social doctrine. The strange thing is that the suggested title doesn't immediately seem to square up with the reported contents. Deus Caritas Est was about the particularly Christian sort of love which is 'Caritas' in Latin. Spe Salvi was about hope and salvation. However, Caritas in Veritate would seem to suggest an encyclical dealing with the relationship between truth and Christian love.

What's going on?

My guess is that this 'social encyclical' is going to draw on a theme that's very close to the centre of the Holy Father's thoughts. He's consistently argued that the praxis of Christian charity and social reform must be preceded by confronting the question of the truth about God and man... namely in the contemplation of Jesus Christ. Ratzinger has been arguing this for decades. In fact, I think that this is where his fundamental objection to Liberation Theology lies - the huge problem with this movement in was in its prioritising of action over the question of truth. Ratzinger rejects such an approach as failing to respect human dignity and a betrayal of the concrete nature of God's revelation in and through the person of Jesus Christ, Truth-incarnate.

Two from Rocco...

Good news from Westminster where Cardinal Murphy O'Connor should be commended for some stern action:

Murphy-O'Connor, head of the Catholic church in England and Wales, intervened in the affairs of the hospital of St John & St Elizabeth in London, where he is patron, after protracted rows over the adoption of a tighter ethical code banning non-Catholic practices such as abortions, contraception and sex-change operations.

Scalps from Tuesday evening's decision include Aida Hersham, a Persian heiress and socialite, and Jacob Rees-Mogg, son of former Times editor William Rees-Mogg.

The cardinal's office confirmed the appointment of a new chairman, Lord Guthrie of Craigiebank. The former army chief of staff will select new directors, who will meet on Monday. A spokesman for the cardinal said: "In light of recent difficulties and challenges the cardinal asked the board to resign their office. This was to enable a new chairman to begin his office with the freedom to go about ensuring the future wellbeing of this Catholic hospital. The cardinal offered his sincere thanks to the old board and all they had done."

The hospital's deputy chief executive, Claire Hornick, said in a press statement that there was no intention to issue further details about the resignations. It also aimed to allay fears about the future of the hospital: "Lord Guthrie, supported by Cardinal Murphy-O'Connor, has stated that under his chairmanship there is no desire that the hospital be sold and that the committed plan remains to continue the objects of the charity, which, guided by its Catholic ethos, is to serve the local community."...

The GP practice, which has 9,000 patients, has scandalised staunch Catholics, who believe its activities undermine the religious ethos of the hospital....

The cardinal's primary objective has always been for St John & St Elizabeth to remain a Catholic hospital and several issues were jeopardising that aim, including GPs prescribing the morning-after pill and referring patients for abortions.

In 2005 he wrote to the then chairman, Lord Bridgman, and said: "There must be clarity that the hospital, being a Catholic hospital with a distinct vision of what is truly in the interests of human persons, cannot offer its patients, non-Catholic or Catholic, the whole range of services routinely accepted by many in modern secular society as being in a patient's best interest."

The Right Rev George Stack, an auxiliary bishop of Westminster, was appointed to the hospital's ethics committee to ensure Catholic teaching was upheld in the new code. Its introduction, however, led to a boardroom revolt in December, with two directors resigning in protest, arguing that the cardinal placed Catholic values above patient care. Bridgman stepped down a week later.

About time!

Then, there's this wonderfully ironic quotation from Pope Benedict:

"Even with all his humility, Augustine was certainly aware of his intellectual stature. But for him, even more important than great highbrow works of theology was bringing the Christian message to the simple. This deepest intention of his, that guided all his life, emerges from one letter written to his colleague Evodius, where he shares his decision to suspend for the moment the dictation of the books of De Trinitate, 'because they're too exhausting and I think they will be understood by few; even more urgent are texts that, we hope, will be useful to many' (Epistulae 169: 1, 1). So it was more useful for him to communicate the faith in a way understandable to all than than write great theological works."

One need hardly mention how Joseph Ratzinger's plans for a scholarly retirement to Germany were so rudely interrupted.

Pope to Jesuits

The Pope met the members of the General Congregation of the Jesuits this morning. I look forward to reading the English translation of this fairly strong address:

So e capisco bene che questo è un punto particolarmente sensibile e impegnativo per voi e per diversi dei vostri confratelli, soprattutto quelli impegnati nella ricerca teologica, nel dialogo interreligioso e nel dialogo con le culture contemporanee. Proprio per questo vi ho invitato e vi invito anche oggi a riflettere per ritrovare il senso più pieno di quel vostro caratteristico "quarto voto" di obbedienza al Successore di Pietro, che non comporta solo la prontezza ad essere inviati in missione in terre lontane, ma anche – nel più genuino spirito ignaziano del "sentire con la Chiesa e nella Chiesa" – ad "amare e servire" il Vicario di Cristo in terra con quella devozione "effettiva ed affettiva" che deve fare di voi dei suoi preziosi e insostituibili collaboratori nel suo servizio per la Chiesa universale.

I know and I understand well that this [the call to defend Catholic doctrine in difficult areas] is a particularly sensitive and demanding point for you and for some of your confreres, above all those charged with theological research, interreligious dialogue and dialogue with contemporary culture. Precisely because of this I have invited and again I invite you today to reflection in order to rediscover the fullest sense of your characteristic "fourth vow" of obedience to the Successor of Peter, which does not only involve readiness to be sent on mission to far-off lands, but also in the most genuine Ignatian sense of "thinking with the Church and within the Church", to "love and serve" the Vicar of Christ on earth and with that "effective and affective" devotion which should make you his most precious and irreplaceable collaborators in his service for the universal Church.

It should be noted that I've heard some minimalistic readings of the 'Fourth Vow' in suggesting that it merely meant that one should be obedient to the Pope in terms of where one was sent on mission. Pope Benedict, and the true Ignatian tradition, takes it more seriously than that.

Today's Angelus

As I promised, I made it to today's Angelus, and as Fr Z notes there were 200,000 others there to show their solidarity with the Pope. What can be said? It was a joyful moment of prayer with the Holy Father. The contrast with the scenes at La Sapienza couldn't be greater. The police presence was very light despite the numbers present, whilst the protesters in the university had to be controlled by legions of riot-police. There was also a wonderful mix of people there of all ages, although it was surprising to note how many young people showed up. It was also interesting to see the banners of some of Italy's trade unions present - not protesting, but showing that the Pope's voice is welcome in the public arena.
Our professor-Pope can be a tad formal and reserved, but there was no disguising the fact that he was chuffed at the turn-out and the attentive reception that his words received. Rocco draws attention to the intimate tone of his conclusion:

"The university environment, which for many years was my world, linked for me a love for the seeking of truth, for exchange, for frank and respectful dialogue between differing positions. All this, too, is the mission of the church, charged to faithfully follow Jesus, the Teacher of life, of truth and of love. As a professor, so to say, emeritus, who's encountered many students in his life, I encourage you, dear collegians, to always be respectful of other people's opinions and to seek out, with a free and responsible spirit, the truth and the good. To all and each of you I renew the expression of my gratitude, assuring you of my affection and prayers."

I brought my camera with me and snapped the following:



The crowd arriving 20 minutes before the Pope begins the Angelus.



There were plenty of colourful flags and banners.



The crowd spilled out onto the Via della Conciliazione.



Viva il Papa!



The piazza was packed.



A shot of the crowd leaving by the Porta Angelica.

For those who read Italian

The proposed Papal address to the Sapienza University. I'm sure that English translations will be circulating soon.

Edited to add: Amy links to an English translation.

Ruini - Show support for the Pope on Sunday!

The Italian press is reporting that that Cardinal Ruini, the Pope's vicar for the Diocese of Rome, is encouraging the faithful to give a large show of support for the Pope by attending the Papal Angelus at noon on Sunday. Needless to say, there's no way I'm missing that.

Mainstream political opinion in Italy is almost entirely in support of the Pope with reference to the whole Sapienza debacle. Even those who do not agree with him see this as a defeat for the principle of free speech. Amongst ordinary Italians there tends to be an attitude of great embarrassment that the Pope seems to be more welcome in Turkey than he is in the country's largest university. Some of the signatories of the notorious letter which opposed the Pope's attendance are also trying to nuance their position. They claim that the letter should have been private and that it was 'used' by the protesters in a way that was not intended. The rector of the university is speaking of a 'defeat for reason and secularism.'

Catholic students from the Sapienza university were also prominent at today's Papal audience. They were showing that if the Pope couldn't come to them, then they were going to go to the Pope.

They're worse than I thought...

John Allen does us a great favour by reproducing Ratzinger's 1990 remarks on Galileo. Go over there and read it a couple of times.

It seems to me that the then-Cardinal does not even suggest that he necessarily agrees with Feyerabend. When he says:

If both the spheres of conscience are once again clearly distinguished among themselves under their respective methodological profiles, recognizing both their limits and their respective rights, then the synthetic judgment of the agnostic-skeptic philosopher P. Feyerabend appears much more drastic. He writes: “The church at the time of Galileo was much more faithful to reason than Galileo himself, and also took into consideration the ethical and social consequences of Galileo’s doctrine. Its verdict against Galileo was rational and just, and revisionism can be legitimized solely for motives of political opportunism.”

he expresses neither agreement nor disagreement. Rather, reading in context, his emphasis seems to be the fact that there is a debate within secular thought itself regarding the progress made by science since the Galileo case. He goes on to say:

To my great surprise, in a recent interview on the Galileo case, I was not asked a question like, ‘Why did the Church try to get in the way of the development of modern science?’, but rather exactly the opposite, that is: ‘Why didn’t the church take a more clear position against the disasters that would inevitably follow, once Galileo had opened Pandora’s box?’

Ratzinger himself was surprised at the criticism of modern science which has been arising recently.
What's his conclusion:

It would be absurd, on the basis of these affirmations, to construct a hurried apologetics.

He does not suggest that people of faith 'construct a hurried apologetics' based on the reassessment of Galileo by some thinkers. In simpler language, he's warning us, be careful of jumping to hasty conclusions about the relationship between science and faith. And why does he say that?

The faith does not grow from resentment and the rejection of rationality, but from its fundamental affirmation and from being inscribed in a still greater form of reason

And why did he bring up the Galileo case?

Here, I wished to recall a symptomatic case that illustrates the extent to which modernity’s doubts about itself have grown today in science and technology.

The quotation which was hostile to Galileo came from an 'agnostic-skeptic' thinker. The then-Cardinal quoted it, without indicating whether he agreed with it or not. He quoted it to show that there was a debate within modernity. He also warns that those of us who are believers should not exploit this debate for apologetics purposes without thinking it all through - one gets the impression that Ratzinger is very cautious about adopting a position and that there may be significant nuances in any final theological judgement concerning the legacy of Galileo.
Reading the actual words of Ratzinger, it becomes increasingly clear that scientific horror at his 1990 words was a mere fig-leaf to justify an anti-clerical protest on behalf of a bunch of blindly secularist ideologues.

Credit where credit is due

The Telegraph reports the Sapienza controversy very well:

The pope has been forced to cancel a visit to a university in Rome because of fears for his safety.
Benedict was due to address students at La Sapienza University, but called off his trip at the last minute because of a sit-in protest.
The last papal trip to be cancelled for security reasons was in 1994, when John Paul II was due to visit Sarajevo. However, the pope has never been unable to tour Italy in modern times.
Angry students had threatened to blast dance music at the pontiff, and also to dress up as nuns. According to sources close to the Vatican, there had also been "more serious threats".
The official newspaper of the Holy See, L'Osservatore Romano, said that "this is a dramatic threat against the papacy, culturally and civilly".
The controversy began after 67 professors at the university signed a letter saying the pope should not be allowed to give the inauguration speech for the academic year.
The professors accused Benedict of being opposed to science, and cited a speech he gave two decades ago. They argued that the pope would have supported the Church's 17th century trial against Galileo for claiming the earth revolved around the sun.
Although there is little evidence in the speech to support their claim, the students lent their support to the cause, and occupied the dean's office, waving banners which said: "The Pope has occupied La Sapienza. Free the Intellectuals!"
The Italian Bishops' Conference said they were "worried" about the state of the university, which was founded by the Vatican seven centuries ago. "There seems to be part of the secular world which does not argue, but demonises and which does not discuss, but creates monsters," said a spokesman for the bishops.
Students rejoiced when the Vatican finally conceded and cancelled the trip, shouting "Get the Pope out !"
However, Renato Guarini, the dean of the university, said he was "bitterly upset" at the tension on campus.
Romano Prodi, the Italian prime minister, also condemned the students' actions, saying that it had been "unacceptable".

Gah! It's not about Galileo!

BBC Reportage of the Sapienza controversy:

Pope Benedict XVI has postponed a visit to a prestigious university in Rome where lecturers and students have protested against his views on Galileo.
"After the well-noted controversy of recent days... it was considered appropriate to postpone the event," a Vatican statement said.
The Pope had been set to make a speech at La Sapienza University on Thursday.
Sixty-seven academics had said the Pope condoned the 1633 trial and conviction of the astronomer Galileo for heresy.
[snip]
Pope Benedict was in charge of Roman Catholic doctrine in 1990 when, as Cardinal Ratzinger, he commented on the 17th-Century Galileo trial.
In the speech, he quoted Austrian-born philosopher Paul Feyerabend as saying the Church's verdict against Galileo had been "rational and just".

That's the ostensible reason that some of the scientists have claimed for their objections... but really, who gets that upset about such an off-hand remark?
Anyway, the BBC's reportage gets worse:

Fifteen years ago Pope John Paul II officially conceded that in fact the Earth was not stationary.

WHAT? Does someone at the BBC seriously believe that (pace Robert Sungenis) the Catholic Church has been teaching geocentrism until 15 years ago? Granted, some Fundamentalist Protestants have some pretty wacky things to say about biology and dinosaurs, but it takes a serious lack of understanding of mainstream Christian belief to think that it wasn't until John Paul II came along that the Church denied that the earth moved. Sheesh!
Fr Z has a franker and (alas) more accurate take on the situation:

These narrow-minded little brats are probably being pushed by aging hippies, communists, and sexual deviants. Much of the protest seems focused on how "homophobic" Pope Benedict is. Also, apparently the Pope and the Chuch are against science and truth, etc.

Basically, this whole thing is driven by two things: stupidity and lust.

The Church in Italy has been very involved in some matters in the public square. After decades of having no real opposition, the Left is freaking out now because the Church and the Italian bishops are no longer being filtered through the monumentally mediocre and now defunct Christian Demoncrat party. The Church is weighing in on matters like assisted fertilization, civil unions for homosexuals, euthanasia, abortion, etc. The Left and the deviants don’t like this new development at all. Their reactions? Level death threats against the new president of the Bishops Conference and then behave like snotnosed delinquents when faced with opposing views.

The authorities were worried about what image would be created by televising students involved in civil disobbedience confronting the Pope.

Incidentally, this protest against the Pope is said to be based on the 'secular' nature of science. Why aren't the students protesting the presence of politicians at the inauguration of the academic year? Isn't science also non-political?

A question

In Spe Salvi the Pope makes the following point:

In the arrangement of Christian sacred buildings, which were intended to make visible the historic and cosmic breadth of faith in Christ, it became customary to depict the Lord returning as a king—the symbol of hope—at the east end; while the west wall normally portrayed the Last Judgement as a symbol of our responsibility for our lives—a scene which followed and accompanied the faithful as they went out to resume their daily routine. As the iconography of the Last Judgement developed, however, more and more prominence was given to its ominous and frightening aspects, which obviously held more fascination for artists than the splendour of hope, often all too well concealed beneath the horrors.

During the various discussions that have been happening on various 'blogs today, it's been pointed out that the Last Judgement is painted on the western wall of the Sistine Chapel. Now, it's not at all unusual for 'liturgical East' to be 'geographical West', I'm curious as to how it came about that the altar in the Sistine Chapel faces geographical west, towards something that iconographically belongs at the 'liturgical West'. Is there an interesting historical explanation?

Ironic...

Via the International Herald Tribune:

VATICAN CITY: Pope Benedict XVI baptized 13 babies in the Sistine Chapel during a Sunday Mass celebrated at the altar at the foot of Michelangelo's "Last Judgment" wall fresco.
In a departure from tradition, Benedict did not celebrate the Mass at a small altar set up to face the congregation. Instead, he celebrated it with his back to the congregation, which included the children's parents, godparents, grandparents and siblings.
Decades ago, priests routinely celebrated Mass at altars with their backs to parishioners, but after the modernizing changes of the Second Vatican Council in the 1960s, it became common practice for the celebrant to face the congregation.

You've got to love that part about 'departure from tradition'.

Media Reaction...

How wonderful to see the Holy Father confirm to the world that celebrating towards the liturgical East is still a legitimate option! I'm interested in what the media reaction will be however. The Italian newspaper La Repubblica has this rather banal report (translation mine):

"Whilst for other creatures, who are not called to eternity, death means only the end of earthly existence, in us sin creates an abyss which risks swallowing us up forever, if the Heavenly Father does not reach out his hand towards us." These severe words, which contradict the openness of Paul VI regarding the possibility that animals also go to paradise, were spoken by Benedict XVI in the Sistine Chapel before the extraordinary fresco of Michelangelo of the Last Judgement. He did this during the homily of the mass which will be remembered for a long time: after 40 years, for the first time in fact, a Pope has celebrated with his back to the faithful, despite the fact that for the mass of the rite of baptism was chosen from the new post-conciliar missal in Italian, and not that of Pius V, notwithstanding the fact that from the 14th of September last Pope Ratzinger has liberalised the use of Latin.

Continuous Prayer to rid the Priesthood of Paedophilia

Does anyone know anything about this? The Times reports as follows, but I'm wary of taking what it says at face value. It has a poor record in religion reporting:

Pope Benedict XVI has instructed Roman Catholics to pray “in perpetuity” to cleanse the Church of paedophile clergy. All dioceses, parishes, monasteries, convents and seminaries will be expected to organise continuous daily prayers to express penitence and to purify the clergy.
Vatican officials said that every parish or institution should designate a person or group each day to conduct continuous prayers for the Church to rid itself of the scandal of sexual abuse by clergy. Alternatively, churches in the same diocese could share the duty. Prayer would take place in one parish for 24 hours, then move to another.
Vatican watchers said that there was no known precedent for global prayer on a specific issue of this kind. There are about one billion Roman Catholics worldwide.
The instruction was sent to bishops by Cardinal Cláudio Hummes of Brazil, head of the Vatican Congregation for the Clergy. He told L’Osservatore Romano, the Vatican newspaper, that he was acting in the Pope’s name. The Pope wanted Catholics to pray for the “mercy of God for the victims of the grave situations caused by the moral and sexual conduct of a very small part of the clergy”, he said.
Officials said that the prayers were in addition to support for legal action against paedophile priests by their victims and a code adopted two years ago by the Vatican to try to ensure that men “with deep-seated homosexual tendencies” do not enter seminaries to train for the priesthood.
Cardinal Hummes said that the aim was to put a definitive stop to a scandal that had damaged the image of the Church and forced US archdioceses, including Boston and Los Angeles, to pay millions of dollars in compensation to the victims. He said that the scandal was exceptionally serious, although it was probably caused by “no more than 1 per cent” of the 400,000 Catholic priests around the world.

Spe Salvi - Random Observation No. 5

This will probably be my last 'random observation' concerning Spe Salvi, as I have other commitments this afternoon. Apologies for the superficiality of my reading of this document.
Firstly, Amy Welborn links to John Allen on Spe Salvi. He outlines the inital positive welcomes and reports the concerns of the decidedly "progressive" group 'Wir Sind Kirche':

The deliberately wide appeal of Spe Salvi does not mean that early reaction has been uniformly positive. The “Wir Sind Kirche” statement, for example, posed three critical questions about the encyclical:
• Why doesn’t it rely more on Gaudium et Spes, or “Joy and Hope,” the Pastoral Constitution on the Church and the Modern World from the Second Vatican Council (1962-65), which has long been a sort of charter document for the reform wing of Catholicism?
• Why doesn’t the pope ask whether the current structures and disciplinary systems of the church actually promote an atmosphere of hope?
• Will this encyclical generate real hope for progress towards ecumenical reunion?

It's the first of these questions that interests me most. It's striking that Pope Benedict XVI doesn't seem to refer to the Second Vatican Council or its documents at all in the Encyclical. (Take note of that - it could be an interesting trivia question at the theological dinner table.) In particular, he doesn't refer to Gaudium et Spes, the Council's Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World. Why he doesn't would make an interesting study. Two reasons spring to mind and seem worthy of further investigation. Firstly, I seem to recall that Fr Ratzinger as peritus (theological expert) at the council was not enthusiastic about this document and was, I think, of the opinion that much of the second part of the document did not deserve to be part of a Pastoral Constitution (the most important sort of document issued by the Council.) Secondly, it might be that the whole issue of eschatology was not tremendously well dealt with by the Council and this document Spe Salvi reflects a more integrated and mature expression of the magisterium on eschatological matters. I should make clear that these are just my off-the-cuff speculations at the moment... I haven't given the matter much thought and am very much open to correction.
It is worth noting that he does draw on the Catechism of the Catholic Church in several places, and his drawing on the thought of Henri de Lubac so one could hardly accuse the Holy Father of neglecting those positive theological fruits of the Council and the Ressourcement movement. Indeed, one hopes that this encyclical will provoke a renewed interest in eschatology drawing on de Lubac's recognition of the social dimension of salvation and an honest appraisal of whether we take the reality of the Last Judgement seriously. I know that there are some of a more scholastic bent who are not fans of de Lubac, but I think he has something important to say on this issue. The idea of salvation being based around a me-and-Jesus axis does not do justice to the ecclesial dimension to salvation, and, for example, the Augustinian idea of our salvation as part of the Church which he describes as the Totus Christus or whole Christ.
Finally, I think this encyclical deserves particular attention for the manner in which it manages to incorporate some pretty serious biblical exegesis and modern philosophy in a fairly accessible manner.

Spe Salvi - Random Observation No. 4

Offer it up!

I would like to add here another brief comment with some relevance for everyday living. There used to be a form of devotion—perhaps less practised today but quite widespread not long ago—that included the idea of “offering up” the minor daily hardships that continually strike at us like irritating “jabs”, thereby giving them a meaning. Of course, there were some exaggerations and perhaps unhealthy applications of this devotion, but we need to ask ourselves whether there may not after all have been something essential and helpful contained within it. What does it mean to offer something up? Those who did so were convinced that they could insert these little annoyances into Christ's great “com-passion” so that they somehow became part of the treasury of compassion so greatly needed by the human race. In this way, even the small inconveniences of daily life could acquire meaning and contribute to the economy of good and of human love. Maybe we should consider whether it might be judicious to revive this practice ourselves.(Spe Salvi 40)

Actually, there are some interesting aspects of a mystical theology of suffering for others in paragraph 38:

Indeed, to accept the “other” who suffers, means that I take up his suffering in such a way that it becomes mine also. Because it has now become a shared suffering, though, in which another person is present, this suffering is penetrated by the light of love. The Latin word con-solatio, “consolation”, expresses this beautifully. It suggests being with the other in his solitude, so that it ceases to be solitude. Furthermore, the capacity to accept suffering for the sake of goodness, truth and justice is an essential criterion of humanity, because if my own well-being and safety are ultimately more important than truth and justice, then the power of the stronger prevails, then violence and untruth reign supreme. Truth and justice must stand above my comfort and physical well-being, or else my life itself becomes a lie.

Echoes of Charles Williams?

Spe Salvi - Random Observation No. 3

There's a passage at the end of paragraph 33 which expresses very clearly the demand that the encounter with God places on the Christian conscience:

We must learn to purify our desires and our hopes. We must free ourselves from the hidden lies with which we deceive ourselves. God sees through them, and when we come before God, we too are forced to recognize them. “But who can discern his errors? Clear me from hidden faults” prays the Psalmist (Ps 19:12 [18:13]). Failure to recognize my guilt, the illusion of my innocence, does not justify me and does not save me, because I am culpable for the numbness of my conscience and my incapacity to recognize the evil in me for what it is. If God does not exist, perhaps I have to seek refuge in these lies, because there is no one who can forgive me; no one who is the true criterion. Yet my encounter with God awakens my conscience in such a way that it no longer aims at self-justification, and is no longer a mere reflection of me and those of my contemporaries who shape my thinking, but it becomes a capacity for listening to the Good itself.

Certainly, ignorance does mitigate personal responsibility and culpability, but one sees in some circles the idea that 'being pastoral' means not pointing out some of the sinfulness present in this world. The theory is that if the faithful are not presented with the fullness of Christian morality, then God will not hold them responsible for sins committed in ignorance.
I've never been happy with that horribly nominalistic argument as it presents a misleading view of God and of the Christian life. Cultivating a dulled conscience amongst the faithful is depriving them of an encounter with the living God who wants only what is good for them. Living according to a distorted picture of 'the good' will inevitably obscure the vision of the God who is Good. Denying the existence of sin is a denial of the God who redeems us from sin. A lively conscience is the sine qua non of the adult Christian life.

Spe Salvi - Random Observation No. 2

On human freedom:

Since man always remains free and since his freedom is always fragile, the kingdom of good will never be definitively established in this world. Anyone who promises the better world that is guaranteed to last for ever is making a false promise; he is overlooking human freedom. Freedom must constantly be won over for the cause of good. Free assent to the good never exists simply by itself. (Spe Salvi 24)

That's a very succinct description of our fallen reality: Freedom must constantly be won over for the cause of good.