Chelsea Clinton, daughter of ex-President Bill, and Secretary of State, Hilary, married Marc Mezvinsky on July 31, 2010.

A sort of “mixed” marriage — a protestant marrying a Jew.

Otherwise it was a fairly traditional, sensation-free wedding — awful for those media columnists who survive by exposing sensational scandals about “celebrities”.

One commented, “Despite growing up in the White House, Ms. Clinton appears to have emerged ‘relatively normal’. People can’t quite believe it.”

* * *

Another “celebrity”, Julia Gillard, caretaker-Prime Minister of Australia, is famously un-married — living with a de facto male housemate or whatever.

Much more newsworthy.

Much better media.

* * *

Many Australians might shrug, saying mixed marriage isn’t a problem. Living together unmarried isn’t a problem. The only real problem is if somebody stands in front of the TV when I’m trying to watch it.

Yet, deep down, does something tell us that marriage is MORE than a photo-opportunity and/or ego-trip . . . that marriage has something to do with God?

Might God, indeed, have something to say about believers marrying non-believers etc?

* * *

Has confusion about marriage crept even into today’s Church?

The up-dated 1997 “Catechism of the Catholic Church” says:

“A case of marriage . . . between a Catholic and a non-baptised person . . . does not constitute an insurmountable obstacle for marriage, when they succeed in placing in common what they have received from their respective communities . . . But the difficulties of mixed marriages must not be underestimated . . . .”

Two bob each way?

* * *

Before the 1960s, “modernisation” of the Church, the position was clearer:

“From the very beginning of its existence the Church of Christ has been opposed to such unions. As Christ raised wedlock to the dignity of a Sacrament, a marriage between a Catholic and a non-Catholic was rightly looked upon as degrading the holy character of matrimony . . . .”

In practice, however, such marriages happened even then – with the Church trying to insist that the children be brought up Catholic . . . .

Was that already the thin edge of the wedge?

50 days from today, Australia’s Mary MacKillop will be canonised.

Blessed Mary of the Cross will become Saint Mary of the Cross.

The canonisation, celebrated by Pope Benedict XVI, will be in Rome.

Many Australians will travel to Rome — as pilgrims — to witness the rituals in person.

* * *

The official Mary MacKillop Blog (25.8.2010) says:

“The Aboriginal Catholic Ministry Melbourne has prepared a very beautiful ‘Journey Stone’ to commemorate this momentous occasion and Mary’s journey to Rome.

The Aboriginal people of the Aboriginal Catholic Ministry Melbourne have a (project) of giving travellers a journey stone for safe travel.

You are invited and encouraged to take one of these stones . . . with you on Pilgrimage. The stone you hold has been hand painted by an Aboriginal artist (and) comes with this message:

‘As you journey in the footsteps of Mary MacKillop,
may you feel her courageous spirit
as you walk the streets of Rome.
Travel gently with respect
to the places where Blessed Mary once prayed.
Hold the sacredness of the land close to your heart.
Remember the good that she has done in our sunburnt land.
May the spirits of my Ancestors, watch
over and keep you safe.’  © Vicki Clarke 2010”

The blog also says:

“Mary MacKillop’s canonisation is particularly special to the Catholic Aboriginal community. The concern Mary showed for the welfare and education of Aboriginal peoples is well documented and her legacy continues through the work of the Sisters of St Joseph . . . .”

* * *

The real Mary MacKillop had little to do with Aborigines.

Blessed Mary’s official biography by Father Paul Gardiner does mention one occasion when the young Mary MacKillop willingly combed lice out of the hair of an Aboriginal girl, Nancy . . . .

Later, in 1898, Blessed Mary hoped to involve her Sisters in a Northern Territory Aboriginal mission organised by her brother, Father Donald MacKillop.  However, floods destroyed the buildings and the project never eventuated. It was decades after her lifetime before the Josephite Order had a presence in Australia’s north and north-west where most Aborigines lived.

* * *

Invoking “spirits of ancestors” (Aboriginal or any other) as watchers over our lives is sentimental dabbling in paganism.

The Catholic religion encourages us to pray to Saints acknowledged by the Church. Praying at random to others isn’t encouraged in the same way.

Better to pray TO the Church’s recognised saints – FOR our departed ancestors.

Prime Minister Gillard, aware that her election campaign was floundering, started talking about “the real Julia”.

Little changed, but the polls improved for some reason.

One change seems to be that Julia – rational atheist gravely respecting the views of the irrational earthlings who live in religious superstition . . . .

has morphed into . . . .

into someone desperately craving the so-called religious vote — willing to sell her (whatever atheists have instead of a soul) in the process.

Offering good taxpayers’ money to fund people’s trips to Rome for Blessed Mary MacKillop’s canonisation.

Plus promising money to fund school chaplains . . . .

It’s all too sad.

* * *

Yes, some of what passes for religion can be irrational — but one could argue that pure religion is pure rationality.

Also that atheism is a form of (very impure) religion.

Well-known atheists talk about feelings of “awe” and “the beauty of evolution” and so forth. In this way they cater for what people really want — a reason to be humble.

The same would-be unbelievers, when asked why (if there is no designer God) this world is exactly suited to our needs to survive . . . .

They reply with baroquely bizarre and super-saturatedly gullible theories — how there must be an infinite number of universes and this one we’re in just happens to be the one we’re in.

Good stuff.

While mocking us for postulating the “unnecessary” postulate of one God, they themselves postulate a mere multiple trillions of hypothesised universes.

* * *

Mr Abbott tries to stay in contact with reality by saying:

“Faith has influenced my life, but it does not, and I believe, should not, shape my politics.”

It’s a statement worth thinking about.

The Catholic Church claims to have contact, not only with “Faith”, but with the living God himself.

The Church, claiming to be custodian of the Truth (capital “T”), is obliged to offer the world a willingness to patiently lead by teaching and example.

The Church gets a bad press at present – partly deserved – but must persevere in its mission.

Involvement in politics is an indispensible part of that mission.

Australian businessman Dick Smith likes to keep a high profile.

On Wednesday he posed for media photographers with a suitcase full of money — to publicise his offer of $1 million to the young Australian with the brightest ideas about curbing population growth.

He says that if something isn’t done soon Australia’s population will grow to one billion.

First up, Mr Smith wants to slash numbers of immigrants to Australia.

* * *

He calls his so-called Wilberforce Award a “global” award.

Perhaps he plans to curb world population as well?

You can’t achieve that by adjusting immigration numbers.

Cutting world population requires either preventing births or increasing deaths.

Is this whole project, then, just another vehicle for promoting same old sub-human cure-alls — sterilisation, contraception, abortion and euthanasia?

* * *

Australia’s troubles and the world’s troubles do NOT derive from there being too many people.

Cut the world’s population by half tomorrow . . . .

Would wars cease? Would casinos go out of business? Would people stop gossiping about each other, exploiting each other, bullying each other . . . ?

Not likely.

Mankind’s problems are spiritual problems. Attitude problems.

Humans are proud and money-hungry and envious and lazy and lustful and gluttonous and angry – that’s right, they’re in the grip of the seven deadly sins.

* * *

The answer to sin is not political programs.

UN Food and Agriculture Organisation Director-General, Dr. Jacques Diouf, said last year:

“On the earth there is a sufficient number of financial means, effective technologies, natural and human resources, to eliminate hunger in the world once and for all.”

So why don’t we do it then?

Pope Benedict XVI says:

 “The world has enough food for all its inhabitants, provided selfishness does not lead some to hoard the goods which are intended for all.”

He says the causes of the world’s injustices are “of the moral order”.

He has called for the creating of “a great program of education” to promote a change of thinking and “new lifestyles”.

To do this, he says, the “secularist mentality” — the excluding of religious ideas from efforts to reshape the world — must be eliminated.

Cardinal George Pell, head of the Australian Church, came under fire the other day for calling the Greens Party “anti-Christian”.

“It’s not my role,” he said, “to tell people how to vote, but I would make a couple of points.”

His points included advice to examine the Greens policies on their website and judge for ourselves “how thoroughly anti-Christian they are”.

He mentioned in particular that:

 * the Greens are opposed to religious schools.

 * they led attacks on Canberra’s Calvary Hospital because it wouldn’t provide abortions.

 * they belittle the traditional family as being just one alternative lifestyle among many.

 * they favour “marriage” regardless of sexuality or gender identity.

“For those who value our present way of life” he concluded, “the Greens are sweet camouflaged poison.”

* * * 

Greens leader, Senator Bob Brown, yelped, saying, “Greens’ policies for a more compassionate society, a more sharing society, a more dignified society, are the most in line with Christian beliefs.”

One Greens Senate candidate, Lin Hatfield Dodds, once director of a Uniting Church agency, said her party’s policies are “very much aligned with Christian values.”

“I’ve seen the Greens stand up for the environment,” she added, “I’ve seen the Greens stand for a voice for everybody — and they are all core things to the Christian faith.”

They are not. She ought to check the Bible. Although respecting the environment and letting people vote now and then are in line with Christ’s teaching — they are NOT its core.

Obeying the Ten Commandments is closer to the core.

* * *

It might have been more impressive if the Greens had said straight out, “Yes we hate Christians — hypocrites and no-goods as they all are etc.”

We all know that’s what the Greens think.

They themselves become hypocrites by making pretty noises in the hope of scratching up a percentage of the so-called “religious vote”.

* * *

Meanwhile Cardinal Pell was doing his job.

He leads the Church. He has come out and said what the Church stands for in the context of the election.

He deserves no criticism — except in so far as he probably doesn’t do it often enough.

Yesterday in California, a federal judge overturned the state’s ban on same-sex marriage.

In November 2008 a referendum in California known as Proposition 8 voted, by a 52 percent majority, to ban such marriages.

Judge Walker now rules that Proposition 8 “does nothing more than enshrine in the California constitution the notion that opposite sex couples are superior to same-sex couples . . . Because California has no interest in discriminating against gay men and lesbians . . . the court concludes that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional.”

* * *

Judge Walker seems aware that his wishes have no hope, ultimately, of succeeding.

He has granted a temporary stay of his order until Friday, allowing opponents of same-sex marriage time to file appeals which will obstruct — more or less indefinitely — resumption of same-sex marriages in California.

Appeals could drag on for years.

This whole episode may well be a storm in a teacup.

* * *

California’s Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger welcomed the ruling as “a milestone in America’s road to equality”.

Others say that, far from moving towards equality, it’s just another reminder of how some people are more equal than others.

If you believe in traditional marriage, your opinion isn’t equal enough to count for anything whatever – even if more than half the electorate agrees with you.

* * *

 . . . but none of the above analysis addresses the most basic questions.

Do most of those opposing same sex-marriages have any idea of what marriage is?

If God exists, can a marriage be valid that is carried out in a way disobedient to him?

Must not marriages outside a church be suspect?

Marriages in non-Catholic churches – can they be pleasing to God?

Marriages in Catholic churches between couples currently living together in sin — what about them?

Likewise, what about marriages in which contraceptive practices are employed?

What tiny, minimalist, percentage of heterosexual so-called marriages are marriages in an objective sense?

* * *

Of course, only God knows the intentions in the hearts of those involved.

It is not for us to try to do his job.

The Day of Judgment soon comes.

Each of us must look to the saving of his own individual soul.