Ovi -
we cover every issue
Visit Ovi bookshop - Free eBooks  
Ovi Bookshop - Free Ebook
Stop human trafficking
Ovi Language
Ovi on Facebook
Stop violence against women
Murray Hunter: Opportunity, Strategy and Entrepreneurship
Stop human trafficking
BBC News :   - 
iBite :   - 
More on Anti-Catholic Reporting and Bias toward the Church More on Anti-Catholic Reporting and Bias toward the Church
by Dr. Emanuel Paparella
2013-03-25 11:45:34
Print - Comment - Send to a Friend - More from this Author
DeliciousRedditFacebookDigg! StumbleUpon

In the last couple of weeks, as I surveyed various news reports on the conclave to elect a new Pope, I have came to the conclusion that most of the mainstream reporters are either incompetent or incapable of writing about religion. Most of what reads there is usually laced with bias, slander, and innuendo masquerading as facts. Sadly this is also true for some of the articles written for Ovi, but than in all fairness it must be reiterated that Ovi is a magazine of opinion, opinions on various extremes of the political spectrum and not necessarily dovetailing those of its editors.

In any case, if one is going to be covering the oldest institution on the planet, one deeply rooted in history, and make claims about its current status in reference to such millenarian history, then one ought to have some knowledge about the topic or simply have the decency to shut up about it. That basic knowledge can be gathered by simply consulting an encyclopedia of Church history, even an on line one.The historical fact is that contrary to what has been misreported the current period is definitely not one of the most difficult periods in Church’s history. Yes, there are difficulties, as there always are. The abuse scandal does indeed continues to loom over the Church but in all fairness one would never know from the reports of the regular media that under Benedict XVI the Church has gone a long way toward addressing it and establishing zero tolerance toward sexual abuse and pedophilia (often confused as already argued) among the clergy.

The headline of one such articles gave the game away: “Cardinals head to conclave to elect pope for troubled Church.” Another was “One of the most difficult periods in Church History.” How so? the reader may ask. If the best one can produce are minor Vatileaks story and the aging abuse story, then that’s simply a sham, not sufficient to judge an institution that goes back and has survived two thousand years. Even if one wishes to make the case that it only means that the institution has misled and fooled billions over billions of people in two thousand years, a modicum of intellectual curiosity would pose the question: how was a feat managed? We are still waiting for such a question, and investigation and an honest answer from the media. We may in fact never get one.

The fact is that the year 2013 wouldn’t even make today the list of the top-ten of “most difficult periods in Church history.” Considering the rate of growth of Church membership in Latin America and Africa, the contrary may actually be true. This may surprise those who go around proclaiming the imminent demise of a corrupt Church that ought to be disbanded once and for all. So let us simply supply them with some historical facts of Church history devoid of interpretation or Christian doctrine. They may hopefully give them second thoughts before they pick up their pen and write out more tirades out of sheer ignorance.

Here are some facts about the serial execution of the early Popes in the early Church in Rome; a period in Church history which was much worse than our current period of  growth in the Church: the execution of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, the executions of a minimum of 17 Popes during the initial persecution of the Church in Rome: namely Popes St. Peter, St. Anacletus, St. Sixtus, St. Telesephorus, St. Hyginus, St. Pius I, St. Anicetus, St. Soter, St. Eleuterus, St. Callixtus I, St. Urban I, St. Pontian, St. Fabian, St. Cornelius, St. Stephen I, St. Sixtus II, St. Martin I.

The assassinations of the following Popes: Stephen VI, Benedict VI, John X, John XIV, Gregory V, and six or seven other popes who died under suspicious circumstances.

The Persecutions by Emperors Nero and Diocletian, plus various other persecutions and executions up until the Edict of Milan, the Arian heresy, the Gnostic challenge to Christian doctrine, the collapse of the Roman Empire, the sack of Rome by Alaric, the sack of Rome by the Saracens, the massacres by Timur (Tamerlane), various other Islamic persecutions too numerous to mention, the Cadaver Synod, the Saeculum Obscurum, the Great Schism, the Western Schism, various antipopes, the election of Gregory X (a conclave lasting three years), the Albigensian Crusade, the Spanish Inquisition, Pope Alexander VI, the Protestant Reformation, the Act of Succession and the dissolution of the monasteries in England, the reign of Elizabeth I, the Ascendancy in Ireland, the French Revolution, the invasion of the Papal States and the imprisonment of Pope Pius VII by Napoleon, the anticlerical movement in Mexico, The Spanish Civil War, World War II and the Holocaust (estimates of Polish Catholics killed range from 2-3 million, not to mention clergy and religious killed by the Nazis), persecutions under the Soviets and the Chinese Communist party under Mao, and other communist regimes, ongoing persecutions in Islamic countries.

In other words, we’ve already moved out of a rather severely troubled period, but the press won’t allow that. Whatever the Church does ever after, it will always be done “amidst scandal.” We will never be allowed any distance between us and the abuse scandal. For the media, it will always be 2002. This is not to underplay the tragedy and scandal of the sexual abuse crisis and the failures of some bishops to prosecute and defrock offending priests to the full extent of secular and canon law. But if you look at the list above, filled with literally millions of murdered Catholics and decades of trials and social collapse throughout the ages, how can we reasonably call our current state in 2013 “one of the most troubled”? It takes a particularly short view of history, a remarkably limited understanding of the world, and a narrow-minded modernist perspective to think there’s something unique about our times and then advocate the demise of the Church.

Actually, all it takes is a biased media and biased individuals with an ax to grind and an old grudge to dredge looking to paint the Church in the worst possible light. Once they have decided that the Church and its one billion plus adherents are all villains, that need to be put down, everything follows from that. The media appears to be continually revising the story about a new Pope who has taken the name Francis of Assisi and wishes to privilege the poor and downtrodden, but they are not backing off their slimy little attacks and their smear campaigns about cardinals meeting at a time of “strife and scandal for the Roman Catholic Church.”

A few days ago this  was expected to pass as serious historically valid report on the recent conclave: “There are constant reminders of the scandals and controversies facing the Church,” or “In the past month, the only British cardinal elector recused himself from the conclave and apologized for sexual misconduct,” or  “Police detained two women who staged a brief topless protest against the Church before the massed ranks of television crews who have come from around the world to follow the conclave.” Topless dudes are “constant” reminders? Really? What garbage passing as serious journalism!


Print - Comment - Send to a Friend - More from this Author

Get it off your chest
 (comments policy)

Eleana2013-03-25 14:36:07
Please call me Eleana, no need for Ms or my last name. Do NOT use just half of my last name. Winter belonged to a female; my great, great grandmother and Irving was an Irving male of Bonshaw castle in Scotland, which still stands to this day and inhabited by the Irving family. Winter was added to the Irving name as you will notice was placed in front if Irving's. Miss Winter was a formidable woman and that position was rightly deserved. I don't come from a patriarchal family.

Emanuel, there is something very strange about you. Why does EVERY comment written by you have to harp back to the past? If I write an article about the present, surely any comment should also be about the present. Seems you didn’t bother to read my reply to your comment on my last article.
He who cries the loudest has the most to hide. Is it possible to comment on my articles without ad hominem included? By now everyone who reads mine and your articles knows what is being said, without you having to interpret it for them. Similarly, the things you write about will not change, persuade or give the reader a chance to think. My articles are not so much about percentage, facts and figures or ancient history, but to give the reader a chance to think about the situation or topic I have chosen and then, after deep thought see if they gel with what I have written or have come up with their own conclusion based on not just what I have written, but life itself. Their life.

Emanuel, I notice that no matter how much I read what you have written, I don’t know the person Emanuel. I only know about other men you have written about. I know more about Thanos than I do you. How about writing about something with substance that has wholly come from you and you alone?

Eleana2013-03-25 14:59:14
To reply directly to your article which is clearly directed at me, I have no need of Catholic history when writing about the present and neither does anyone else. Fact.
If I wanted to purchase a video game for adult women and I ask at the counter what is available and the salesman brings me a video of the history of gaming. I say that I don’t want to know the history of gaming; I want to buy a game suitable for adult women. The salesman insists: “Madam. You must first rent this video/DVD, so that you can make a fair assessment of the game while you are playing.” Getting annoyed now. “Just sell me a game. I don’t give a hoot about it’s history.” Nope, not getting a game from this shop. Go to another shop and walk out with a game in 5 minutes.

I despise the seedy goings on in the Catholic Church and I am happy to be a catalyst for change. I denounce the Catholic Church today, yesterday and in the dim dark past. Yes, I have read about vile things way back hundreds of years ago and when Jesus couldn’t even trust his own friend. You would think he had better judgement, but was betrayed by Judas. I will continue to write about the Catholic Church whilst I think of things to say, until I run out. No need Emanuel, to put up the same old line of defence time and again. We’ve all got your message.

Eleana2013-03-25 15:25:22
Wrong on ignorance. Only in your opinion Emanuel.

Wrong on 'minor' Vatileaks. Your opinion again as to minor. Very major to others.

Wrong on the oldest institution on the planet. As if that even matters.

Confused abuse and paedophilia among 3% of clergy. Wrong. No confusion at all. Wrong about 3%.

Wrong about Pope Benedict Xvi. He did very little and took part in cover-ups for the sake of the reputation of the Catholic Church. Most likely reason for abdicating. He abdicated his responsibilities to live the rest of his life in luxury.
Emanuel tells us about all the popes that have been executed or assassinated. Why do we need to know this? Is it a point of interest to the article? Or, is it something to be proud of and to be held in high esteem?
2002? What date does this signify? In Australia it dates back to the 50’s, the 60’s, the 70’s, the 80’s and 90’s and right up to this very day. Pure speculation, but I’d take a wager that a priest is mishandling a poor child as I write, somewhere in the world. THAT is how prevalent child molestation is in the Catholic Church. I fully realise these things go on in the rest of society, but a priest can rape a very young boy, then go down on his knees and forgive himself for it; then do the same thing again the next day. And to think that God is forgiving him is pure bullshit. As a Gnostic I know this for certain. These are the things that Gnostics know and are born with the knowledge.

In my opinion, raping a child is worse than murdering an adult with a grudge.

Eleana2013-03-25 15:29:08
It is the most troubled because the Church should know better by now. They hold themselves in such high esteem, but all they are is rubbish. A cult of protected paedophiles.

Emanuel Paparella2013-03-25 17:46:06
Footnote: Those readers who may at this point be having doubts about the sincerity and honesty of some of the attacks on the Catholic Church, long on vitriol, short on objective facts, revealing an anti-Catholic agenda, that we unfortunately have seen exhibited in some of Ovi’s contributions on the election of a new Pope, so replete by the desire to browbeat the Catholic Church that basic facts, honesty and perspective are simply egregiously dismissed and a line of decency is crossed and disregarded by turning the table around and slanderously accusing 97% of priests of pedophilia and the Popes "celebrating" it, the ultimate aim being not the telling of the full story but the lambasting of the Church, I would recommend two books by David F. Pierre, Jr. (who operates TheMediaRport.com) titled Catholic Priests Falsely Accused: the Facts, the Fraud, and The Stories and Double Standard: Abuse Scandals and the Attack on the Catholic Church. The readers will thereby acquire a better and more honest perspective on the subject.

It can safely be predicted that the vitriol will not cease with this article, it will continue via the comment section under this very article: the sexual abuse scandals which are now at least 10 years away will continue to be brought forward to advance a nasty anti-Catholic agenda and I will continue to be smeared with the slanderous innuendo that somehow I am a staunch defender of the crime of pedophilia. I suppose in a magazine of opinion the vietriol has to be tolerated for the sake of free speech but it remains a shameful action not to be tolerated in silence, for silence more often than not is complicity.

Emanuel Paparella2013-03-25 18:11:48

P.S.S. Those readers who have no time to read the suggested books on this matter, may wish to read four short articles at the above site titled 1) Gainging Some Perspective on the Papal Election, 2) The Media's Hidden Agenda behind its Obsession with Abuse in the Catholic Church, 3)Bishops Respond to Media Bias and Inaccuracies, 4) New Shocker: Widespread Media Claims of Sadistic Abuse at Ireland's Famed Madgalene Laundries Determined to be Completely Bogus.

I have completete confidence in the Ovi readers' ability to determine for themselves themselves determine the veracity of those reports.

Eva2013-03-25 19:37:53
Emanuel, I have been reading Ovi for a number of years now, and you will recognize that I have also commented on many occasions on your and other people's articles.

I do not question your obvious knowledge nor your faith, it's all very impressive. Good for you.

But I agree with Eleana, in her comment and question that why does every comment you make in Ovi have to have historical facts and footnotes to x amount of books and articles? For a mere mortal like myself, it gets very tiring to read, and it makes your arguments weaker - not stronger, as you might think. I would like to hear you talk like an ordinary person, not - as Eleana points out too - read comments that "interpret" hers and other peoples articles - nor am I interested in you "correcting" them.

Not everybody is a professor or a doctor, but your comments are often very patronizing. Please don't think that we, the readers, are stupid.

Like you have stated yourself: Ovi Magazine is a place for opinion, and the beauty is that anybody can express themselves about anything.

I appreciate your articles, knowledge and opinions, but in this case I disagree with you that media is on a witch hunt on the catholic church. Bad things have happened, and there is every reason to dig further. Yes, so there will be some misleading headlines and reports - c'est la vie - but if the church is so pure as you want to make it out, it should have no problem defending itself.

That's all for now. I will keep reading your articles with great interest - but ignore most of your comments.

Eleana, my advice to you (after reading Ovi since 2005) would be not to bother getting into an argument with Emanuel - he won't listen, and he won't ever get your point.

Murray Hunter2013-03-26 02:00:36
Dear Eva,
Yes you are right. In the year or so I have been reading OVI, I have never read the good professor express his own opionion. It would be nice for a change that instead of hiding behind someone else or expressing negative comments about other people's ideas that he perhaps tell the readers what he reallly thinks about something himself. I have seen that he truly values the title professor and should act like one intellectually. Who is Emanual Paparella, I think nobody really knows. There is little point reverberating just what others have said in the past. Any of my students can do that to pass their exams.
As you said, I respect someone who has faith. Instrad of continuing to beat the drum about the catholic Church, maybe he should just go to church on a Sunday.
I would love to see the professor "come out" from the closet.
Have a great week everybody

Emanuel Paparella2013-03-26 09:01:26
Eva, I know you have declared that you do not read or will not in the future read my “condescending” comments, a statement which curiously enough is contradicted by your own rather lengthy comments to my comments, but I am afraid you have it up-side-down. I would not be writing for Ovi if I sincerely thought that its readers were stupid. To the contrary, the reason I keep writing for the magazine (and it goes back uninterrupted to six year ago) is that, as I have repeatedly declared to its editors and the readership at large, I have full confidence in the ability of its readers to judge for themselves the veracity and the validity of the diverse opinions expressed therein. Socrates who was told by those he irritated (that is why they called him a gadfly) to shut up or go to another city or another magazine as the case may be, was fully confident that the truth of the matter would eventually be vindicated, even if for the moment he had to take the hemlock.

Some of the opinions expressed, perhaps you’d concur on this, are rather bizarre and devoid of logic and rationality, to say the least; but in a magazine of opinion, and to the credit of its editors, you and I, and everybody else for that matter, remain free to read or not to read what is being posted as an article or as a comment. There is also a cathartic psychological usefulness to the comment section to be considered, since the editors saw fit to permanently head it by the caption: "get it off your chest." But most importantly, we also remain free to agree or disagree and to express that agreement or disagreement while remaining cordial and civil and avoiding condescension and paternalism or maternalism, that is to say we remain free to react and rebut via comments what we think is an abuse of free speech. For example I disagree, and have not been persuaded otherwise yet, with those who say history if bunk and our ancestors’ thought on perennial issues is not important and ought to be ignored, for I believe that those who do so and speak out of ignorance of history and what our ancestors have said on a particular issue, run the risk of having to reinvent the wheel (aside from the disrespect for our betters and the bias toward the modern and “progressive” not to speak of the anti-democratic spirit toward those ancestors it also reveals); they also run the tremendous risk of repeating all the worst mistakes of history. Professor Paolozzi has eloquently made that case recently within the Ovi pages.

I have said it before and I repeat here once again: it would be very unfortunate if Ovi were to eliminate or even severely limit or censor the comment section through which readers, whether they actually use it or not, remain free to critique what they read and not feel that they are a captive passive audience. I am of course not talking about cases that go over the line of decency and honesty. But there is no need however to turn the exercise in free speech into a nasty demonizing ad hominem diatribe by a sophistical use of slander, smear and innuendos, as indeed it has been done recently when it was egregiously implied that I am somehow a defender of pedophilia and by implication I may be one myself, or impute my veracity by declaring that I actually do not teach philosophy at the two institutions declared in my Ovi short bio; a preprehensible action this never apologized for and I predict will never be. I believe most readers would agree with my assessment of those actions and they certainly weaken any argument pro and con, no matter how well thought out it may be. The best way to avoid such negative result that I know of is to simply stay away from personal attacks and stick with the issue at hand open-mindedly and in an objective, scholarly and honest mode via universal reason devoid as much as possible of the mere emotional. If you have a better way, I remain open to being persuaded.

Eva2013-03-26 11:08:34
Emanuel, actually for once I agree and like your answer - you see, we do agree on a basic level! On top of it all, you managed to only mention Socrates once in your answer :)

My best wishes to you, have a great day and let's all be friends.

Emanuel Paparella2013-03-26 11:18:18
I will not dignify with a reply all the ad hominem innuendos spewed forth above by good professor Hunter except to note that curiously enough, since his very first contribution to Ovi, he has never omitted the title Professor before his name, but now egregiously alleges that I love the title too much, insinuating once again that I may not in fact have it or that, has he has also implied before, that I am some kind of impostor inventing titles, degrees, publications and affiliations, and that I need “to come out of the closet,” and that I do not actually teach philosophy at the two institutions of higher education as stated in my Ovi bio.

As already mentioned, I trust that most readers will readily see through those rather dubious and shady ad hominem sophistical tactics and judge for themselves how valid the insinuations concocted out of them are, for indeed anyone who needs to resort to those tactics must be either unable or unwilling to confront an issue (such as that of the bias toward the Catholic Church)intellectually.

Murray Hunter2013-03-26 12:37:07
Dear Professor Paparella,
Please stop all your ranting and raving and saying that there are innuendos against you. All I would like to read is what you actually think about some issue. You are a very intelligent man, I would love to see you put it to use and say something.
Of you did that professor you might actually shock yourself. Im just sad to see all that potential in you go to waste. Thats what Im trying to say and I think others are as well.
have a good week Sir.

Eva2013-03-26 14:54:48
Aaah, Emanuel, you were doing so well... and then you're off again. Same rants as ever and bla, bla bla. Sigh.
But you are right that most readers do indeed see through certain arguments - maybe not the ones you're referring to, but... oh well. I just wish that you would give it a rest sometime.
Murray, I agree.

Emanuel Paparella2013-03-26 15:26:09
Dear Professor Hunter,

Thank you for your touching backhanded compliment and concern for my “wasted potential” and my “raving and rantings” but no thanks, I continue to insist that issues at hand and ad hominem arguments are not to be mixed; it is like mixing fragrant perfume and smelly garbage.

I prefer by far that the deans at the institutions where I teach philosophy, the editors of the magazine and its readers determine if what you cavalierly allege here is indeed the case.

I don’t believe that anybody has appointed you as their spokesperson and certainly nobody, that I know of, has appointed you as my character judge and prosecutor, or for that matter spokesperson for the magazine; that seems to be the attitude on your part.

Regretfully, you have already rather boorshingly lectured me once regarding your father teaching you to tell the truth while impugning my assertion in my Ovi bio that I teach philosophy at Barry University implying that I was some kind of liar and impostor that had simply concocted facts. The charge now is that nobody knows anything about me and I should “come out of the closet” and reveal whom I am. My own parents however did in fact teach me that when one proceeds with such cavalier charges and insinuations without proper evidence and one is then proven mistaken on them, the minimum proper response is not to double down on the charges and the innuendos while turning the table with accusations of raving and ranting, but to apologize to the one so slandered.

Emanuel Paparella2013-03-26 16:39:53
“I have never read the good professor express his own opionion. It would be nice for a change that instead of hiding behind someone else or expressing negative comments about other people's ideas that he perhaps tell the readers what he reallly thinks about something himself.” (Professor Hunter)

Really Professor Hunter? Here is one opinion on the latest issue at hand for the third and final time. Obviously you missed it. I trust this time around you will pay some attention to it so that you do not have to repeat what is expressed above that is so patently false and thus leave the impression that indeed what is at work is bias against the Catholic Church and not a desire to arrive at the truth of the matter.


Dr. Emanuel L. Paparella

Emanuel Paparella2013-03-26 21:31:31
P.S. Professoor, as regards the expression of my own opinion, again this a distorted fact simply thrown against the wall hoping that it sticks. Had you taken the trouble to survey the 300 articles plus that I have written for ovi in the last six or so years, not to mention the comments and the debates, you may not have come out with such a ridiculousy and palpably false statement. Boomeranging is a genial aboriginal Australian invention but here too it would appear that the colonizers have not profited from its knowledge. Be careful professor.

Murray Hunter2013-03-27 01:28:45
Dear Professor Emanuel Paparella,
This has become very boring already and a complete waste of time.
You actually dont even understand what I was getting at many months ago about the professor issue. Yes you were once a professor at Barry University teaching philosophy. No one has ever disputed that. The fact is according to the university faculty as of today you are retired, and agreed back on contract teaching. Upon retirement you title is no longer applicale, unless you are given an honorary or emeritus title.
Im sorry that this has become a big issue for you and regret bringing it up because you are acting like a child over it.
Anyway out of respect I still address you as professor all this time as you can see.
Anyway I dont want to waste any more time placating all these issues.
Next time say it with some empathy forthe people who were abused. As you would certainly know professor there are more than words to words.
Good day to you Professor.

Emanuel Paparella2013-03-27 08:55:03
“...I just wish that you would give it a rest sometime. Murray, I agree.”

If I interpret your above comment correctly, Eva, what you and a few other prominent contributors to our magazine are telling me is to simply “shut up for we have had enough of your ravings and ranting.” Clever indeed, by conveniently reducing the argument to the ad hominem ravings and ranting of a lunatic, the inconvenient truths he enunciates do not have to be addressed and no apologies have to be proffered. But as the English like to quip, it is clever by half in a magazine of opinion which respects free speech.

Come to think of it, there was a man in Greece a long time ago who was told to leave Athens for they who ruled the city had had enough of his ravings (they in fact dubbed him the gadfly) and since he would not willingly leave the city he was made to shut up once and for all via the hemlock. Surely you know who that man is. Sorry for bringing him up again; it will probably vex you and may even prompt the insinuation that I am an ancient or medieval man (a sort of lunatic Don Quixote) in the post-modern 21st century, but you see, and surely you know by now if you have been reading Ovi for at least six years, that it is an inveterate habit of mine to refer everything to what has gone on before in history. That may seem retrograde or a lack of originality, as Professor Hunter likes to say, but it helps me, if nobody else, in not having to reinvent the wheel, in predicting where events may be heading, hopefully not ostracism or the hemlock…, and in not repeating glaring mistakes unnecessarly.

Emanuel Paparella2013-03-27 12:48:40
“This has become very boring already and a complete waste of time. You actually dont even understand what I was getting at many months ago about the professor issue. Yes you were once a professor at Barry University teaching philosophy. No one has ever disputed that. The fact is according to the university faculty as of today you are retired, and agreed back on contract teaching. Upon retirement you title is no longer applicale, unless you are given an honorary or emeritus title. Im sorry that this has become a big issue for you and regret bringing it up because you are acting like a child over it.” (Professor Hunter)

Sir, indeed the issue is becoming rather tedious and a waste of time but in all fairness you ought to at least acknowledge that you were the one who instead of sticking to the issues at hand in your comments decided to start hitting below the belt and descended to ad hominem arguments. The issue is indeed a big issue since you have made it an issue of character, given that you were the one who brought up that your father taught you to always tell the truth and then slanderously insinuated in a comment that I was not telling the truth, as you indeed do once again in the above comment. Either you are ignorant of the facts which you have simply imagined, or you are lying since the facts are definitely NOT as you report them.

In the first place the information that I once taught at Barry University and no longer do so, is FALSE. While it is true that I am retired I neverthless continue teaching nevertheless on a part time basis, something which I intend to continue doing. I am in fact currently teaching philosophy at Barry University in their Adult Education Program section (ACE) and have been doing so for the last six years or so. I have no idea where you got your information but should you continue to put into question my veracity and impugn my integrity, and wish to wish corroboration for the correct information I just stated, feel free to call the institution and inquire. Once you find out that in fact I continue teaching presently in the ACE program of Barry University, and have been doing so for the last six years, you may wish to issue a retraction, stop the spreading of false information, if an apology is beyond your ability.

Moreover, for the record, I also teach philosophy at Broward College and have been doing so for the last two years or so. I have also been teaching Italian there for some 13 years. At both institutions I have the title of professor, a title which I have had since 1981 when I was teaching full time at the University of Puerto Rico and before I retired. Those are the empirical facts, sir, not the ones you give with false data. Good day.

Emanuel Paparella2013-03-27 17:19:27
P.S. To return to the subject at hand, which is that of "the last acceptable bias," to resort to the tactics here exhibited is to be suspect of the same tactics when it comes to a fair and just evaluations of the sexual abuse scandals in the Catholic Church, which is not to deny in any way that those abuses occurred or that I am defending pedophiles as has been outrageously been insinuated by Ms. Winter-Irving, or to deny that compassion and sympathy ought to be shown to the victims as has also been insinuated...

Truthfulness however requires fairness and balance devoid of bias and axes to grind and old grudges to resurrect, and until that is achieved I am afraid that the issue will not be put to rest, never mind our puny insignificant personal concerns and vanities about our titles. Michelangelo placed no titles before his name but is now known by his first name, not Buonarroti as reward for well deserved achievements, idem for Dante (Alighieri) or Raffaello (Sanzio). However, when someone challenged the fact that Michelangelo had sculpted the Pietà at the age of 25, he sculpted his name on the sash of the Madonna, the only one of the signed sculptures by Michelangelo.

I know that some readers think history is bunk and we should worry only about the present if we wish to be original, but I figured I'd remind them of this true story so that they don't end up reinventing the wheel and repeating the mistakes that have already occurred in the past.

Let those who have ears, let them hear. Not very original, agreed, but most important lessons have already been imparted by history as Croce and Professor Paolozzi have well taught us recently; it is only the ignorant of history who think of themselves as novel and original.

Lawrence Nannery2013-03-28 06:17:45
Well, I agree with the most basic position that professor Paprella has laid down for discussion, namely, the total self-centered and ignorant reaction of the Americna press to everything Roman Catholic. They cover elections for the papacy as though they were a crappy little election in some hick town in Tennessee or something. It is not like that at all.
I want to call upon everyone to shut up for a minute and listen: it is not about your feelings, and it is not about pedophile priests, of which there are many times more in the Episcopal Church than anywhere else.
A distinction has to be made between doctrines of belief, on the one hand, and religious rituals, on the other. The first group is unalterable, since the believers believe them to be true, and the latter element can be modified for any good reason that the Pope and the clergy decide.
As Emmanuel knows, since I have shared them with him, my views about Pope John Paul the Second are negative, but that was because he was much less than the press credited him for being, a showboat who made himself too much of himself, and he wasn't such as smart guy as he thought he was, and laid off on Ratzinger all the blame for the toleration of probable cases of sexual crimes against young people. He really tried to act as an Evangelical. Ugh!!! Every evangelical I have ever met is already a potential genocidal maniac.
For those of you who do not know much about the Roman Catholic faith, you should not render judgments about subjects you admit you do not know anything about.

Im Linkedin2013-03-28 06:28:36
As an onlooker its all best settled in Dr. Paparella's own words in his entry on Linkedin. Readers can make up there own mind.

Emanuel Paparella's Overview
Current Adjunct Professor at Barry University
Another college I work for currently at Broward College, Central College, Davie, Florida
Emanuel Paparella's Summary
Emanuel L. Paparella is a former professor of Italian at the University of Puerto Rico and the University of Central Florida. He is the author of various books: Hermeneutics in the Philosophy of Giambattista Vico (Mellen Press, New York, 1993), A New Europe in Search of its Soul (Authorhouse, 2005), Europa: an Idea and a Journey (Exlibris, 2012), Tre Novelle Rusticane di Giovanni Verga (ed. 1975, Florentia Publisher), as well as innumerable articles on Italian literature and philosophy. He holds a BA from St. Francis College in Brooklyn, N.Y., an MA from Middlebury College in Italian Literature, a M.Phil. and a Ph.D. in Italian Humanism from Yale University. He has also studied Comparative Literature at New York University, is a former Fulbright scholar and has directed for five summers the study abroad program of the University of Central Florida snd Broward College at the University of Urbino. He has published for Italian journals and newspapers, the latest for Libro Aperto (April-June 2012) with an article commemorating the anniversary of the death of Benedetto Croce titled "Una rivalutazione della Filosofia di Benedetto Croce" (pp.186-190) which was reviewd in La Repubblica (July 28, 2012). He has done a major translation: Vittorio Possenti's Philosophy and Revelation (Ashgate Publishing, 2001), Since 2000 he has actively participated in the debate on the European Union while lecturing and teaching humanities and philosophy at Barry University in Miami and Broward College in Davie, Florida.

Im Linkedin (part 2)2013-03-28 06:29:33
Emanuel Paparella's Experience
Adjunct Professor Barry University

Currently holds this position

Another college I work for currently Broward College, Central College, Davie, Florida

January 1997 – Present (16 years 1 month)

Broward College is the college of Broward County, Florida located in Davie, Florida. I teach Italian there.

I'm Linkedin (part 4)2013-03-28 08:07:17
This is Dr Paparella's designation at Broward Cellege


Not currently on faculty of Adult and continuing education at Barry according to the website, so must be retired:
So must be part time adjunct

Hope this public information is useful to all.

Emanuel Paparella2013-03-28 11:57:31
Once again, although this time around the good professor Murray Hunter does not affix his name to the insinuation, false information is being gathered and disseminated with the implication that I am a liar and an impostor. The question is why? If I had been writing just about historical events and offered no original views and opinions that go against the grain and the politically correct positions, I doubt the good professor would bother with the innuendols and vitriolics he has exhibited so far.

Be that as it may. I challenge the good professor to a wager of $10,000 that in fact I presently teach philosophy, as we speak, at both Broward College and the ACE program of Barry University. I predict that the good professor will not accept the challenge (duly notorized) but will either decline or come up with more misinformation. Should he surprise me and accept the challenge I'd like it notorized by an international notary.

Emanuel Paparella2013-03-28 12:26:15
Greetings Larry and thanks for interjecting some light in this bizarre foggy diatribe which wishes to pass as a dialogue of sort. Your comments come as a breath of fresh air among the ad hominem insinuations some contributors have seen fit to descend to. I have been declared a defender of pedophile priests. One cannot avoid the question why. The only plausible explanation I can think of is that those interlocutors are unable or unwilling to engage the issue at hand and therefore they have to strike down the messenger carrying unwelcome not politically correct news. I predict that you will be meted out the same treatment. It’s a question of time.

Emanuel Paparella2013-03-28 16:09:10
P.S. For the record and for those who continue to disseminate false information, had they taken the trouble to simply look up my bio in the list of contributors under “Ovi Team” they would have found this data:

Emanuel L. Paparella has a BA (major in philosophy) "St. Francis College, NYC", an MA "Middlebury College, Vt" in Italian Literature, an M.Ph. in Comparative Literatures and a Ph.D. in Italian Humanism from Yale University. A former professor of Italian at the University of Puerto Rico and the University of Central Florida where he was director of the Urbino Summer Program from 1998 till 2001. He is currently retired, residing with his wife Cathy and his three daughters. In the last six years Dr. Paparella has taught philosophy at Barry University situated at Miami Shores, and for the last two years he has also been teaching philosophy at Broward College in Davie, Florida.

I stand by each and every word in the above biographical statement which is empirically factual and true and I challenge those who would like to denigrate my good name and our magazine and reduce it to a mere journal of gossip, politically correct trends, innuendos and ad hominem attacks and insinuations, to check and even investigate those facts and then have the decency to apologize for their slander and their false reporting.

The silver lining in this last unfortunate incident at Ovi is that those who unfortunately have had recourse to those reprehensible tactics have left the suspicion in the readers' mind and other contributors that their treatment and information on the Catholic Church cannot be too dissimilar from their treatment of my good name and reputation.

Indeed as the anonymous disinformer says, the readers will ultimately decide on this matter which will not be put to rest till the simple truth is acknowledged, and decency prevails and apologies are proffered. Sorry it has come to this among educated and intelligent people but I suppose knowledge is not always virtue contrary to what the ancients alleged.

Lawrence Nannery2013-03-28 20:16:59
Thank you for your response. The sloppy thinking that goes on in America is astounding. They think that the latest fad is always the way to go. The sole reason to not allow gays to have equal rights rests upon the absolutely obvious fact that the sole abusers of young boys are 100% gay men. No one else is attrcted to them.
Yet, even this week, The New Yorker magazine has come out with an issue in which there are unrelated articles defending gay relationships, a condemnation of Catholic priests, and then a long article on a strange man who was an English teacher at a vey posh High School some years ago, who molested all his favoritw students. The article ends with an apologia, because one of the boys said he fell in love with the man! Cross-purposes, eh? The only thing clear is a hatrd of Catholocism. Talk about prejudice!

Emanuel Paparella2013-03-28 22:45:52
Indeed Larry. Anti-Catholicism as the last acceptable bias in our confused 21st century Western world is what has been displayed once again at this Papal conclave and predictably will be displayed once again at the next conclave: it is after all the politically correct stance in the media and other assorted ignoramuses who know precious little of the history of the Church and wish to remain ignorant for they have declared history bunk, but then wish to pontificate (pun intended) on the subject when their only agenda is the lambasting of the Church. Talking of confusion and lack of clarity and straight thinking. What is even more bizarre is that the bias is presented as concern for justice and compassion for the victims and those who dare contradict them are then egregiously attacked with ad hominem insinuations and even branded as heartless defenders of pedophiles. We have unfortunately seen this display of indecency and intellectual confusion in the comment section and even in full length contributions urging the dissolution of the Church. Given that this is a magazine of opinion, I suppose the silver lining here is that we have learned something in the ways of bias and slander. At least one would hope so.

© Copyright CHAMELEON PROJECT Tmi 2005-2008  -  Sitemap  -  Add to favourites  -  Link to Ovi
Privacy Policy  -  Contact  -  RSS Feeds  -  Search  -  Submissions  -  Subscribe  -  About Ovi