Evolution and Genesis

Bible interpretations shape how people believe. Many take parts of the Bible as literal, some take it as metaphorical. The story of Genesis is one of the best examples of misinterpretation. Many atheists refute Christianity solely because the Earth cannot be made in six days. Humans did not show up in a day when there is evidence that the human race took thousands of years to develop into a homo sapien. Days in Genesis are not recognized as days. God does not have day and night since he created the concept of time. So the metaphorical day in Genesis can be the length of time for humans to evolve. Also, the human race is one of the youngest species on the earth. In Genesis, God created humans last.

The Features of Love

Love is a subjective concept because it doesn't mean the same thing to different people. We obviously love different people, and we love people for different reasons. It's impossible to objectify love because it must apply to a specific people or objects.  For example, we don't just say "I feel love", but rather "I love" someone, because love is not a concept that we feel objectively, but a subjective feeling towards something. This isn't to say that there aren't similar components between the way people love others, but just means that each subject, or each person, must engage in the act of loving; no one can do it for another person. 

The Church's understanding of love is two-fold. One part comes from the Christ's New Commandment: love your neighbor as yourself.  This basically implies the Golden Rule, treat others in the way you want to be treated. Love of self is instinctively ingrained into every person; we intuitively value ourselves and our goals. Christ says that love means that we not only have to respect and love ourselves, but extend that same love to others, because we must recognize that they value themselves just as much as we value ourselves. This is manifested in the obligation all people have to help the poor and vulnerable, because they lack the means to help themselves. The second part of love is love of God Himself. We say that the virtue of charity is supernatural when it is infused by the Holy Spirit, as true love of God must be. Love requires near full knowledge of a being, and with humanity's finite limitations, full knowledge of an infinite being such as God is impossible. The full Catholic understanding of love as love of one's neighbor and love of God is manifested in the act of marriage. The Church recognizes three, not two, members in each marriage: the husband, the wife, and God. Both facets of Catholic love are present in a marriage: the man loves the woman, vice versa, and they both love God. 

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03592a.htm

Papal Infallibility

One of the most hotly contested and divisive topics between Catholicism and other sects of Christianity is the authority of the papacy, specifically papal infallibility. Protestant and Orthodox denominations are loath to accept the authority of the Pope, seeing as they deny that Christ created the post at all. We can get to Christ's establishment of the papacy in a later post, but this one just assumes that the pope does have authority as the Vicar of Christ. Even so, there are still some objections to infallibility, most of which result from a misunderstanding of the teaching. For example, some people point out that in Paul's letter to the Galatians, Paul corrects Peter: "But when Cephas came to Antioch I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned" (Gal 2:11). This, they argue, must mean that Peter, as the Pope, was incorrect and therefore his words are fallible. Others argue that popes disagree about theological teachings, and because two contradictory teachings cannot simultaneously be infallible, the doctrine of infallibility is untrue. However, both of these arguments stem from a misunderstanding of papal infallibility as extending to every word or thought that popes say or think. The Catholic Church defines papal infallibility as:

"The Roman Pontiff, when he speaks ex cathedra, that is, when carrying out the duty of the pastor and teacher of all Christians by virtue of his supreme apostolic authority he defines a doctrine of faith or morals to be held by the universal Church, through the divine assistance promised him in blessed Peter, operates with that infallibility with which the divine Redeemer wished that His church be instructed in defining doctrine on faith and morals; and so such definitions of the Roman Pontiff from himself, but not from the consensus of the Church, are unalterable."

In neither situation in the objections listed above were the popes acting infallibly, or ex cathedra. In context, Paul was correcting Peter and chastising him on his imprudence. Imprudence is definitely not a teaching, much less one given ex cathedra. As for popes having different opinions, infallibility only applies when the pope speaks in union with his bishops or from the Seat of Peter, not when describing his own personal beliefs. So it's very obvious that objections to the doctrine of infallibility can be refuted by correctly understanding the doctrine. 

https://sites.google.com/site/apostolicapologetics/Bishop-of-rome/papal-infallibility#TOC-Objections