<[email protected]> wrote: MOST of the times, it CAN be a remission. A remission is not a cure. The Church does not accept miracles of cancer because it is RISKY to say that a cancer patient was cured... I think it is NOT a question of English, but of medical terminology, which respects the facts...
COMMENT: I will not comment on Ivo's statement wrt the Church's position on miracles or wrt Remission v Cure. I certainly do not know enough about the Church's position on Miracles and Ivo does not have a clue of medicine - despite his visits to to Post Office. However, I do believe that it IS a question of ENGLISH as far as Ivo is concerned. He has demonstrated that he is either incapable or unwilling to understand the difference between (a) ALL cancers are curable and (b) Cancer is curable esp. Some Cancers have been cured. Ivo probably belongs to the school of thought which believes that a person did not live because he eventually died at the age of 99. It appears that couple of chaps presently living in Goa are in urgent need of courses in English Comprehension. They either serially and stubbornly misquote or shamelessly misrepresent the facts. It would be "cheaper" IF they attended a prolonged "Retreat" ....before they spouted nonsense again. That would, at least, result in a Remission. jc
