Ivan_Melgar_M wrote: People are dying in Africa because of an epidemic which was not caused by Catholic Church, I don't agree with the position of the Church towards the condom, but every person is free to decide if they follow it.

Are you joking? Catholics are being threatened with eternal damnation if they use condoms.

Iván wrote: Mr ProgFreak wrote: They're so evolved that almost half of all the people in the USA believe in Creationism.   I believe this people are going beyond reason, most of the churches accept evolution, there are 50,000 Christian churches, but Catholics represent more than 2/3 of the Christian (1.7 billion) and we believe in evolution, most Christian churches believe in evolution, only small groups deny it.

They may say that they believe in the concept. But they're making some exceptions, and they refuse to accept the consequences. Most importantly: That humans are nothing special compared to other animals. We are not the end product of evolution, we're merely a transitional form.

Iván wrote: And at the end..What's your problem, they are free to believe in whatever they want, it's not your problem, it's their problem.

It becomes my problem when their faith leads them to make decisions that affect my life.

Iván wrote: Mr ProgFreak wrote: I know it perfectly well. You mean miracle healers such as Mother Teresa? Come on, it's simply fraud. Doctors have protested in many cases, but the Vatican simply proceeded anyway. You don't know a bit about the process of admitting a miracle, What you say is false,there has been more than a thousand miracles claimed in Lourdes, only 67 have been sanctioned by the Church, and only after independent institutions have certified them...It's not the Church who says there is no explanation, hospitals and doctors have witnessed and testified, some of them atheists.

I don't accept the independence of these institutions. I've seen details about the Mother Teresa miracles, that's enough for me to question the process.

Iván wrote: Mr ProgFreak wrote: Any miracle healing that could possibly impress me would be one that holds up to scientific evaluation. You're cleverly saying "beyond science" or "beyond any scientific explanation", since you know full well that no respected scientist agrees with the classification of any of these incidents as miracles   Of course, some atheist "experts" won't accept a miracle classification, I seen them on TV say "Hey we can't explain it, but we are sure it's not a miracle"

Growing back a limb - that would be something. But so far I haven't seen an example of a miraculous cure that couldn't have happened naturally. They're always explainable. And with millions of people visiting a place like Lourdes every year, you're bound to get a case where even a terminal illness improves. It's very unlikely, but if you give it a couple of million tries it can happen. The problem is that the church never mentioned the millions of failed miracle healings.

Iván wrote: That's a very comfortable position.

It is ... for the church.

Iván wrote: . Mr ProgFreak wrote: (A documentary by Dawkins, first aired on Channel 4 in the UK. This first part is about Lourdes, a place in France which has been visited by millions of sick people, but there are only 66 cases of reported miracles (!), none of which hold up to scientific investigation)   I couldn't expect anything else from Dawkis, The Medical committee at Lourdes is totally independent of the Church.has CERTIFIED several miracles.

CERTIFIED = Infallible truth. Noted that for future reference.

Iván wrote: It's easy to say "No one is proved", but he doesn't explain each one, he doesn't dare to talk with experts who certified the miracle, would love to see him discussing with an expert who supports the miracles....But he won't do that, I'm sure he will say "You are delusional and I'm nort discussing with you", even if medical charts and X rays are presented. Iván

The Church's stance is that this gradual appearance has been guided in some way by God, but the Church has thus far declined to define in what way that may be. Commentators tend to interpret the Church's position in the way most favorable to their own arguments. The International Theological Commission statement includes these paragraphs on evolution, the providence of God, and "intelligent design":

"In freely willing to create and conserve the universe, God wills to activate and to sustain in act all those secondary causes whose activity contributes to the unfolding of the natural order which he intends to produce. Through the activity of natural causes, God causes to arise those conditions required for the emergence and support of living organisms, and, furthermore, for their reproduction and differentiation. Although there is scientific debate about the degree of purposiveness or design operative and empirically observable in these developments, they have de facto favored the emergence and flourishing of life. Catholic theologians can see in such reasoning support for the affirmation entailed by faith in divine creation and divine providence. In the providential design of creation, the triune God intended not only to make a place for human beings in the universe but also, and ultimately, to make room for them in his own trinitarian life. Furthermore, operating as real, though secondary causes, human beings contribute to the reshaping and transformation of the universe." (paragraph 68)