HEY! THANKS FOR THE LINK!

To: The Rittenhouse Review
From: Jennifer Nicholson Graham
Date: August 6, 2003

I just came across The Rittenhouse Review and saw a recent post -- “Fawning Over Coulter” -- in which you linked to my essay in the Philadelphia Daily News on Ann Coulter, “What Would Ann Coulter Eat?”

Thank you so much! Your site is wonderful -- both its design and content -- and I was flattered for the mention.

Warmest regards,
Jennifer Nicholson Graham
Philadelphia Daily News

Jim Capozzola of The Rittenhouse Review responds:

Thank you, Ms. Graham, for your kind remarks. They are much appreciated.

I’m grateful, as well, that your colleague, Beth Gillin of the Philadelphia Inquirer, who on the sane same day published a shockingly fawning profile of the aforementioned Coulter, “Coulter, Sweetly Disembowling the Left Wing,” is a good sport and sent to me similarly positive comments that I cannot, for reasons I someday hope will become clear, cannot be republished here at this time.

48 HOURS LATER . . .

To: The Poor Man, Body and Soul, and The Rittenhouse Review
From: Arne Adolfsen [adolfsen@earthlink.net ]
Date: July 16, 2003

You wrote, in response to J. Capazzola [sic]’s riff on Norwegians (and by extension my) personal hygiene, this:

“I’m sorry, but the Norwegians may know what they are doing on this one. Listen: Norway’s a cold place. How cold? I don’t know, but pretty fucking cold, I can tell you that much. And where there’s cold weather, you can bet there’ gonna be polar bears.”

And Mr. Capazzola [sic] labelled [sic] you some kind of jeeenyus (TM) for that comment. (Mr. Capazzola’s [sic] wide-eyed-with-astonishment-betcha-didn’t-know-this comment about Scandinavians having founded the city of Kiev -- this after his self-congratulatory comment that he’s researched the history of the Scandinavian countries, and even looked into their languages, and really, really, really wants to travel there some day. (I’ll note here only that he hasn’t deigned to answer my email that the Swedes (mostly) who founded both the Russian and Ukrainian states, and founded Kiev, which he found so astonishing that he had to write about it, and Novgorod and who knows how many other Russian and Ukrainian cities, referred to themselves in their own language as the “Rus[.]” Gosh, where did the word “Russia” come from? Let’s ask Jim! He’ll tell us based on some over-elaborated and -- for non-Philadelphians -- terminally skippable post about some Philadelphia thing or other, along with fey semi-comments about his clinical depression and multiple fatal conditions. Jeesh! You’re the only person on earth with 1) clinical depression, and 2) one or more mortal diseases! I’ll have to alert my parents, a couple of my cousins, my lover, several co-workers, and probably lots of tourists I try to shove out of the way in Hollywood as I’m going to work.

Feh. I hate bloggers who just bounce idiotic crap around from site to site (“well, X said y, and here’s what I think about y”; oh, well, “X” said “y”, and here at “h” we say “y” is the Golden Standard and here’s what I think about what “X” said).

All AVERAGE (day and night, combined and averaged) temperatures are given in Fahrenheit measurements from www.worldclimate.com:

This is the average temperature, in Fahrenheit, for Oslo from 1816-1991

Jan: 24.3 Feb: 25.2 March:30.9 Apr: 39.9 May: 50.5 June: 58.8 July: 62.4 August: 59.7 Sept: 52.0 Oct: 42.4 Nov: 32.9 Dec: 26.8 Year: 42.1

And here’s polar-bear ridden Edinburgh between 1764 and 1960:

Jan: 37.2 Feb: 38.5 March: 40.5 Apr: 44.8 May: 49.8 June: 55.4 July: 58.5 August: 57.7 Sept: 53.8 Oct: 47.7 Nov: 41.5 Dec: 38.7 Year: 46.9

Oh, and from their igloos, fighting off polar bears and saber-tooth tigers with pitch-and-resin torches, not to mention fighting away those menacing mastodons, the unfortunate residents of Chicago have announced that their average temperatures between 1873 and 1988 were:

Jan: 24.8 Feb: 27.5 March: 36.7 Apr: 48.0 May: 58.8 June: 68.5 July: 74.1 August: 73.0 Sept: 66.0 Oct: 54.7 Nov: 41.0 Dec: 29.5 Year: 50.2

And those cave people bereft of heat and light in Paris! What can you do but sigh, shed a tear, and move on when confronted with the average temperatures for Paris from 1981-1990 figures:

Jan: 38.7 Feb: 38.7 March: 45.1 Apr: 49.5 May: 56.7 June: 61.7 July: 66.2 Aug: 65.7 Sept: 61.0 Oct: 54.5 Nov: 45.1 Dec: 41.4 Year: 52.2

And, gosh, those folks unfortunate enough to huddle in Budapest must be really miserable (or were from 1953 to 1990):

Jan: 29.1 Feb: 33.1 March: 41.7 Apr: 51.6 May: 60.6 June: 66.2 July: 69.6 Aug: 68.5 Sept: 61.5 Oct: 51.6 Nov: 40.6 Dec: 33.4 Year: 50.7

Hell’s-bells, you’d freeze in Oslo unless you were eaten by a polar bear first. You’d be SO MUCH warmer in Budapest, where I guess you’d be eaten by a Black Sea sturgeon thrown-off the track by one of Condoleeeeezzzzza (I can’t remember how many e’s or z’s) Rice’s warnings of WMD terr’rist combat units who’ve infiltrated/spread around the US. Oh, wait. She hasn’t any such announcement. Err, am I halucinnating [sic] that the Bush Jr. administration is acting responsibly?

>>Eeeooooweeeeeooooooweeeeeooooo<<

You will give up your brain for the next ten minutes.

>>Eeeooooweeeeeooooooweeeeeooooo<<

Ummm, where am I? Uhhhh...color me Pale Apricot to match my bedroom’s off-white walls according to Asscrack’s terr’rism alert color symbology. I can’t think of one of them (Bush Jr.’s cabinet folks) who I’d even consent to share a football setting for a picnic with. I think they’re all completely corrupt.

Still, total stupidity about the climate in Norway by self-proclaimed pundits is truly embarrassing and sheds -- in my opinion -- an EXTREMELY suspect light on ALL bloggers who have unthinkingly linked to this dunderheaded thepoorman post.

Arne Adolfsen
Los Angeles

Jim Capozzola of The Rittenhouse Review responds:

Sorry about that, readers. Mr. Adolfsen apparently really, really needed to get that out. He was up all night writing it.

SLEEPING WITH NORWEGIANS

To: The Rittenhouse Review
From: Arne Adolfsen [adolfsen@earthlink.net ]
Date: July 16, 2003

Better yet, did you know that the Vikings who settled in Russia and the Ukraine -- mostly Swedes; my Norwegian ancestors went south (Normandy), southwest (Scotland, England, Ireland) and west (Iceland -- actually, the first couple waves of Norwegian settlement of Iceland were made up largely of men of Norwegian origin/ancestry settled in Ireland along with their Irish Celtic wives, which explains the appearance of Irish names like Ciartan in Icelandic -- Kjartan) -- called themselves “Rus”? (What a convoluted sentence! But what an interesting factoid!)

And why don’t my Norwegian cousins change their underpants more often? Shudder. The two Norwegian nationals I’ve slept with in my adult career as the very model of a modern homosexual had clean shorts on (for part of the evening, anyway) as far as I could tell at the time. I guess I should have been more attentive. Maybe Norwegians changed their undies more often 20 years ago than they do now? (They did, didn’t they? Pretty please?)

By the way, I really love your blog. We have similar, but just different enough to make it interesting, takes on things.

Arne Adolfsen
Los Angeles

THOSE CRAZY CICADAS

To: The Rittenhouse Review
From: Melanie Mattson
Date: July 14, 2003

The cicada invasion was in 1987. I was in Washington then and still am, so I look forward to the return of the 17-year cicada next summer.

Actually, I’m not looking forward to it, as I found it quite dreadful on the last go-round.

I moved to Washington, got married in 1986 (that date is memorable), and now-ex-hubby and I were just getting ready to put our house on the market in April 1987.

I was actually walking to the subway to go downtown and see a client the morning they emerged. The ex and I had been up all night dealing with printer problems for my client presentation that morning. Having given up on thinking of sleep at about 5 a.m., he turned to painting window frames, and I helped until it was time to head downtown.

We watched them all emerge from the ground, which was eerie enough, and climb onto trees to dry and change color, which was past wierd, and then there was the sound!

Funny you should bring this up now. On my way out to the parking lot to get in the car yesterday, I was remembering horror and doing the math in my head to figure out when we were going to have to deal with it again. Next year. Maybe I’ll move to Ohio for the summer.

Melanie Mattson
Falls Church, Va.

Jim Capozzola of The Rittenhouse Review responds:

I forgot about the crawling out of the ground part. Fortunately I missed that aspect last time around. I wonder how people in earlier times interpreted that event!

MORE ON DAVID FRUM

To: The Rittenhouse Review
From: Tom Benjamin
Date: June 13, 2003

Kevin Briand’s letter [Ed.: See “David Frum: Wayward Child,” below.] wondering how David Frum became David Frum struck a real chord for this Canadian.

Frum’s mother was a fine journalist with a wonderful presence. She was truly beloved.

Via this link you will find a CBC archive that includes many of her more memorable moments, including her interviews with Margaret Thatcher, Nelson Mandela, and Mordecai Richler.

I’m sure she’s spinning in her grave.

Tom Benjamin

SUPPORT FROM A FELLOW BLOGGER

To: The Rittenhouse Review
From: “L”
Date: June 12, 2003

Bravo, Jim!

I've been following your blog for quite a while now, but I'm quite new to blogging myself, and it was only a couple of days ago that I stumbled into this mess by accident (not involved myself; just wound up reading about it -- in that horrifically fascinated way that one can't help but stare at a car wreck).

Anyway, people who know your blog know better than to believe that kind of screed. In fact, reasonable people who don't know your blog still know better than to believe that kind of screed. I'll happily continue linking to you.

Best wishes,
“L” (Name withheld by request.)

MORE ON MARRIED CLERGYMEN

To: The Rittenhouse Review
From: Max
Date: May 21, 2003

You seem to know a good deal of the history, but this old Catholic Encyclopedia article may be instructive [See "Married Priests in Iceland," The Rittenhouse Review, May 20.]:

Finally, in 1123, at the First Lateran Council, an enactment was passed (confirmed more explicitly in the Second Lateran Council, can. vii) which, while not in itself very plainly worded, was held to pronounce the marriages contracted by subdeacons or ecclesiastics of any of the higher orders to be invalid (contracta quoque matrimonia ab hujusmodi personis disjungi…judicamus -- can. xxi).

This may be said to mark the victory of the cause of celibacy. Henceforth all conjugal relations on the part of the clergy in sacred orders were reduced in the eyes of canon law to mere concubinage. Neither can it be pretended that this legislation, backed, as it were, by the firm and clear pronouncements of the Fourth Council of Lateran in 1215, and later by those of the Council of Trent, remained any longer a dead letter. Laxity among the clergy at certain periods and in certain localities must undoubtedly be admitted, but the principles of the canon law remained.

The only thing Lyndewode makes clear, quoted above, is that the English Church in the 15th century refused to recognize the existence of any such entity as the priest's "wife." It knew of nothing but concubinage and denied to these any legal right whatever or any claim upon the property of the partner of their guilt.

Basically, priests were breeding through the 17th century. The practice became increasingly scandalous -- and rare -- with time. Nonetheless, it remained common in rural areas, particularly those isolated from Rome. Legally, of course, there was no such thing as a priest's wife, but whether called a concubine or not, her sons often inherited the land/position of the father.

I wish I could think of a good book on the subject, but this was not my specialty when I studied such things. Le Roy Ladurie's book Montaillou gives a somewhat sensational (but entertaining) picture of village life in the late middle ages. It is based on the inquisition records of Jacques Pamiers, which are a fantastic source -- and some of them are on-line here.

You might also look into Natalie Zemon Davis and Carlo Ginzburg if you are interested in semi-anthropological accounts of pre-modern village life -- which is the context that clerical marriage needs to be viewed in, not councils in Rome.

Max

DAVID FRUM: WAYWARD CHILD

To: The Rittenhouse Review
From: Kevin Briand
Date: May 20, 2003

After reading today's post about David Frum, I was reminded (again) of how far he falls short of the standards set by his mother. [See "David Frum: Swimming With the Fishes," The Rittenhouse Review, May 21.]

His mother, Barbara Frum, was one of the most respected and influential woman journalists that Canada ever had (though she was born in Niagara Falls, N.Y.).

To really appreciate just what an idiot he is, you need to realize that he didn't just crawl out of the woodwork. In fact, he had a highly respected, admired, and competent role model to facilitate his future career.

Those of us who can remember what a quality journalist she was are truly saddened and disgusted whenever we come across the latest contribution from her son (whom I'm increasingly convinced was adopted).

Information about Barbara Frum can be found at this CBC website.

Kevin Briand
Houston

BUFFY: NEITHER SLUT NOR BIMBO

To: The Rittenhouse Review
From: Chris Lark
Date: May 22, 2003

Could you please elaborate more on your beef with "Buffy The Vampire Slayer"? [See "There Truly is a God," TRR, May 19.]

Was it actually worse than "Xena:Warrior Princess," "Sabrina The Teenage Witch," "La Femme Nikita," and "Charmed"?

Also how do you argue with this point I constantly hear from Buffy's female fans?: It gave young women a role model to identify themselves with on TV. Buffy was a true modern heroine who wasn't a slut or a bimbo.

Am I fan of Buffy? Not exactly. Will I take her over, oh, let's say Ally McBeal? Oh yeah.

One last question before I go, how come Joss Whedon and David E. Kelley get to make big TV shows and we don't?

Chris Lark

Jim Capozzola of The Rittenhouse Review responds:

I don't know why you don't make "big TV shows," but the reason I don't is because I'm just too damned lazy.

ABOUT THOSE ICELANDIC PRIESTS

To: The Rittenhouse Review
From: Bruce Webb
Date: May 22, 2003

Although my graduate training was in medieval history, my particular emphasis was Britain before 1066, and so while I am not an expert on the subject of Icelandic priestly celibacy and marriage or cohabitation, I do have some background in this area. [See "Married Priests in Iceland," The Rittenhouse Review, May 20.]

First I would refer to you this article, which explains that Pope Alexander VI, elevated in 1490, was the father of the Borgias -- yes, those Borgias -- and openly secured riches and lucrative offices for his many children.

And while the Icelandic Bishop Jón Arason may have been ignorant of the finer points of the Second Lateran Council, presumably some of his near-contemporaries at the Vatican were at least vaguely aware of the strictures incumbent on priests.

Although Alexander VI was not typical for Roman Pontiffs he was fairly representative for the clergy at the time. The point you have missed, but one that is clear on first examination of the texts, is that clerical celibacy is not at all about sex, it is about marriage. And even more clear is that in medieval Europe marriage was not about sex, it was about legitimacy, which means inheritance.

The one constant of medieval history is the attempt by king and bishop alike to keep property from being permanently alienated from their control. Property rights that initially were granted in return for a specific service (whether war or preaching) were constantly being transformed into inheritable property. While on the whole this was a losing battle for kings, who gradually had their income base shifted from property to taxes, it largely was won by the Church.

Property that accrued to the church remained under its control. And while there are multiple examples of "nephews" of high clergy being granted lucrative clerical offices, the principle of clerical celibacy prevented large chunks of property being permanently alienated.

To your specific example, note that your quote was "priests commonly lived with women and had children." Now there is nothing in that that implies "marriage." And my reading leads me to conclude that priests openly cohabitating and procreating with women was rather the norm than the exception in Western Europe, particularly as you move down the income scale. And, generally, where property rights were not at risk, the Church really didn't care.

Bruce Webb
Everett, Wash.

Jim Capozzola of The Rittenhouse Review responds:

Thank you for your interesting and informative letter.

As relates to the example of married or cohabitating Icelandic priests in the 16th century, as discussed in A Brief History of Iceland, by Gunnar Karlsson, I presumed, probably incorrectly as you imply, that the phase "priests commonly lived with women" implied marriage.

However, lacking access to Karlsson's text in the original Icelandic, I cannot offhandedly determine what the author actually wrote. I suppose I am filtering the English translation by Anna Yates through a decidedly 21st century view, keeping in mind that this is a book that runs to just 72 pages, implying a need for Yates to be brief and concise.

I think a definitive finding on this matter would require an investigation into the prevalence of cohabitation in Iceland during the period, among the clergy and the populace at large, but that is a topic for another day.

I must disagree, however, with your point that "clerical celibacy is not at all about sex, it is about marriage." This may have been true centuries ago, but I don't think this notion applies to the Church today. But that, too, is a topic for another day.

BUFFY'S THE BEST!

To: The Rittenhouse Review
From: Mark Gisleson
Date: May 20, 2003

I'll keep reading The Rittenhouse Review, but I'm sorry I gave in and started checking out TRR, per your cajoling.

Now that I know you didn't like "Buffy The Vampire Slayer," I will always think less of you and your opinions. [See "There Truly is a God," TRR, May 19.]

In a one-on-one contest with Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Pa.), you'd have my vote (if I lived in Pennsylvania), but otherwise I have to question your decision-making process.

If you are saying that 99.99% of all TV is rot, that's one thing, but "Buffy" was clearly in the top 0.01%.

Let me stand in solidarity with my young blonde comrade, as you should as well: vampires, demons, Satan, Karl Rove, the GOP...What's the difference?

Mark Gisleson
St. Paul, Minn.

COMMON PROBLEMS IN CATHOLICISM AND BUDDHISM

To: The Rittenhouse Review
From: Michael Siegel
Date: May 21, 2003

There is a historical parallel to what which recently has been going on in the Catholic Church that has been largely ignored. [See "Married Priests in Iceland," The Rittenhouse Review, May 20.]

A very similar situation occurred in China and Japan in Buddhist monasteries. (A good account is given in Bernard Faure's The Red Thread.) Priest and monks often took young boys as sexual partners.

Now, the interesting thing is that in many sects, Japanese monks and priests are now allowed to marry. This perhaps solved the problem of molestation, but introduced new ones as well.

Traditionally, the teacher had passed his lineage on to his best student. Once monks had families, however, it became a matter of course to pass it on through the family. Priesthood became a fairly lucrative profession, a "trade" like anything else. Many say this has degraded the practice.

Michael Siegel
Newton, Mass.

ON TARGET ON "BUFFY"!

To: The Rittenhouse Review
From: Curtiss Leung
Date: May 21, 2003

I'm glad someone is willing to go against the grain and say out loud what I've been thinking for a while: "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" is garbage. [See "There Truly is a God," TRR: The Lighter Side of Rittenhouse, May 19.]

It's teen porn with intellectual pretensions.

I visit your main site regularly, but this is the first time I've looked at "TRR The Lighter Side." I'll make a point to be back.

Signed,
Curtiss Leung
Brooklyn, N.Y.

WARREN BUFFETT'S TIMING

To: The Rittenhouse Review
From: Andrew W. Cohen
Date: May 21, 2003

The timing of Warren Buffett's recent Washington Post op-ed may be spot on. [See: "A Rational Voice Amid the Cacophony of Absurdity," The Rittenhouse Review, May 21.]

I assume he's trying to get fellow Nebraskan Sen. Ben Nelson (D) to change his vote on the bill that comes out of conference.

Signed,
Andrew W. Cohen
Assistant Professor of History
Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs
Syracuse University
Syracuse, N.Y.

Jim Capozzola of The Rittenhouse Review responds:

Ah...Very good point. I think you're right. And I hope it works!

IT'S ALL ABOUT ME!

To: The Rittenhouse Review
From: "Kaspu" kas2416@yahoo.com
Date: May 20, 2003

Never in all my born days, have I ever, ever, seen a more self-referential blog than yours.

Signed,
"Kaspu"

Jim Capozzola of The Rittenhouse Review responds:

Thanks for visiting the site. And so often! I'm glad you're enjoying it.

"Kaspu," by the way, for readers unaware, is a psuedonym for a little -- and I mean that -- swamp monster otherwise known as the Babylonian Sewer Rat, who, despite his self-styled he-man insult-flinging, likes to hide behind fake names. When and why the little rat developed his unrequited schoolgirl crush on me has not yet been determined.

DRINKS ARE ON ME (OR HER, ACTUALLY)

To: The Rittenhouse Review
From: Vicki Roush
Date: May 16, 2003

If you come to Key West for a visit, your first few cocktails are on ME.

Love your site and grieve with you for Ashleigh Moore.

Lots of working-class lefties at the bar. You'll like it.

Signed,
Vicki Roush
Green Parrot Bar
Key West, Fla.

MURRAY DUBIN WRITES

To: The Rittenhouse Review
From: Murray Dubin
Date: April 1, 2003

You made mention last week of the Philadelphia Inquirer's "Conversations on War" series. [Ed.: See "'Conversations on War': With Rittenhouse Reader Susan Madrak," The Rittenhouse Review, March 26.]

As its [Ed.: the series's] author, I wanted you to know that the series began on Wednesday, Oct[ober] 29, and has appeared weekly except for the week of January 1[, 2003]. The interview [conducted] on Wednesday, April 2, will be the [published on the] 22nd.

Murray Dubin
Philadelphia Inquirer
Philadelphia

DON'T FORGET FEINSTEIN

To: The Rittenhouse Review
From: V.W.
Date: April 1, 2003

Speaking of continually disappointing, you omitted my senator, Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.). [Ed.: See "Is Your State Being Underserved? Senators of the 108th Congress," The Rittenhouse Review, March 30.]

Sen. Feinstein can speak very well but vote very badly when the vote counts: e.g., pro Bush tax cut, pro rollover for Bush resolution on Iraq in spite of overwhelming opposition from her constituents. My other senator, Barbara Boxer (D), and my representative, Susan Davis (D), both took the courageous high road and voted against conceding authority to President George W. Bush.

To quote Sen. Feinstein's Senate floor speech of October 10, 2002 regarding her position on the Iraq resolution:

I serve as the Senior Senator from California, representing 35 million people. That is a formidable task. People have weighed in by the tens of thousands. If I were just to cast a representative vote based on those who have voiced their opinions with my office and with no other factors, I would have to vote against this resolution.

But as a member of the Intelligence Committee, as someone who has read and discussed and studied the history of Iraq, the record of obfuscation and the terror Saddam Hussein has sown, one comes to the conclusion that he remains a consequential threat.

Although the ties between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda are tenuous, there should be no question that his entire government is forged and held together by terror.

In other words, Sen. Feinstein knows more than her constituents and their opinions are irrelevant.

By the way, 2002 was not an election year for her, so a difficult reelection campaign wasn't a factor.

V.W.

FROM MAINE TO GEORGIA

To: The Rittenhouse Review
From: Rick O'Leary
Date: March 31, 2003

Other bloggers, Mary Beth Williams of Wampum, for example, may disagree, but Maine should not be on the list. [Ed.: See "Is Your State Being Underserved? Senators of the 108th Congress," The Rittenhouse Review, March 30.]

Sens. Olympia Snowe (R) and Susan Collins (R) were instrumental in beating back the special protection for Eli Lilly & Co. last fall. Sen. Snowe was a leader of the group of moderates who defeated the President's $726 billion dollar tax cut proposal at a time of ever growing deficits and war. And both senators voted against oil drilling in Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

I live in Georgia. I wish we had senators as good as Snowe and Collins.

Dwight Meredith
P.L.A. - A Journal of Politics, Law & Autism

UNDERSERVED? TRY NOT SERVED AT ALL

To: The Rittenhouse Review
From: Steven desJardins
Date: March 31, 2003

You left out Washington, D.C. [Ed.: See "Is Your State Being Underserved? Senators of the 108th Congress," The Rittenhouse Review, March 30.]

If not having any senators isn't embarrassing, then what is?

Signed,
Steven desJardins