“Holiness was always something richly dim.”

“Montana A great many small failures have brought me to thisDark room where, against the teachings of the church,I lie in the forgiving dark with you and we kissAnd loosen our clothing and feel the hot urgeToward nakedness, man’s natural destination,The slow unbuttoning, unclasping, until at lastWe lie revealed. The fine sensationOf you on my skin. A slender woman as vastAs Montana and I am now heading westOn a winding road through the dark contoursOf mountains and into a valley, coming to restIn a meadow that I recognize as yours. This is what I drove across North Dakota to find: This sweet nest. And put all my failed life behind.”

“The older Puritans had trampled down all fleshly impulses; these newer Puritans trampled no less self-righteously upon the spiritual cravings. But in the increasingly spiritistic inclination of physics itself, Behaviorism and Fundamentalism had found a meeting place. Since the ultimate stuff of the physical universe was now said to be multitudinous and arbitrary “quanta” of the activity “spirits”, how easy was it for the materialistic and the spiritistic to agree? At heart, indeed, they were never very far apart in mood, though opposed in doctrine. The real cleavage was between the truly spiritual view on the one hand, and the spiritistic and materialistic on the other. Thus the most materialistic of Christian sects and the most doctrinaire of scientific sects were not long in finding a formula to express their unity, their denial of all those finer capacities which had emerged to be the spirit of man.”

“They were a remarkable company, each one of them a unique person, yet characterized to some extent by his particular national type. And all were distinctively “scientists” of the period. Formerly this would have implied a rather uncritical leaning towards materialism, and an affectation of cynicism; but by now it was fashionable to profess an equally uncritical belief that all natural phenomena were manifestations of the cosmic mind. In both periods, when a man passed beyond the sphere of his own serious scientific work he chose his beliefs irresponsibly, according to his taste, much as he chose his recreation or his food.”

“Belief must be something different from a mixture of opinions about God and the world, and of precepts for one life or for two. Piety cannot be an instinct craving for a mess of metaphysical and ethical crumbs.”

“Looking at Great-Great Grandpa Baldwin’s photograph, I think to myself: You’ve finally done it. It took four generations, but you’ve finally goddamned done it. Gotten that war against reason and uppity secularists you always wanted. Gotten even for the Scopes trial, which they say was one of many burrs under your saddle until your last breath. Well, rejoice, old man, because your tribes have gathered around America’s oldest magical hairball of ignorance and superstition, Christian fundamentalism, and their numbers have enabled them to suck so much oxygen out of the political atmosphere that they are now acknowledged as a mainstream force in politics. Episcopalians, Jews, and affluent suburban Methodists and Catholics, they are all now scratching their heads, sweating, and swearing loudly that this pack of lower-class zealots cannot possibly represent the mainstream–not the mainstream they learned about in their fancy sociology classes or were so comfortably reassured about by media commentators who were people like themselves. Goodnight, Grandpa Baldwin. I’ll toast you from hell.”

“No one attribute so clearly distinguishes man as does the intelligent will or the will to act intelligently. It was by the exercise of their wills that spiritual beings in the beginning gathered information rapidly or slowly, acquired experiences freely or laboriously. Through the exercise of their wills they grew, remained passive, or retrograded, for with living things motion in any direction is possible.”

“In marked contrast to the relaxed, typically Latin attitude of the Dominicans the Protestant missionaries were still proceeding at full blast with the fight for souls. These North American evangelists of strictly fundamentalist inclination combined in a curious fashion strict adhesion to the literal meaning of the Old Testament With mastery of the most modern technology. Most of them came from small towns in the Bible Belt, armed with unshakably clear consciences and a rudimentary smattering of theology, convinced that they alone were the repositories of Christian values now abolished elsewhere. Totally ignorant of the vast world, despite their transplantation, and taking the few articles of morality accepted in the rural Amenca of their childhoods to be a universal credo, they strove bravely to spread these principles of salvation all around them.Their rustic faith was well served by a flotilla of light aircraft, a powerful radio, an ultra-modern hospital and four-wheel-drive vehicles — in short, all the equipment that a battalion of crusaders dropped behind enemy lines needed.”

“Writing my own novels in the ’90s…I never imagined that in ten years, science and rationality would require explanation and defense in a world rocked and ruled by religious fervor. ”

“When the highest value in a community is loyalty to the greater cause, meaning the continuity of the status quo, all means to this end are imbued with religious significance, and are thereby justified.”

“It was a strange feeling going into a church I did not know for a service that I did not really believe in, but once inside I couldn’t help a feeling of warmth and security. Outside there were wars and road accidents and murders, striptease clubs and battered babies and frayed tempers and unhappy marriages and people contemplating suicide and bad jokes, but once in St. Martin’s there was peace. Surely people go to church not to involve themselves in the world’s problems but to escape from them.”

“Some people do polarizing the religion against science. I use both to solve a problem with two different kind of approach.”

“Рассмотрим представление о Боге. Мы не знаем, как оно возникло в мимофонде. Возможно, оно возникало многократно путем независимых «мутаций». Во всяком случае это очень старая идея. Как она реплицируется? С помощью устного и письменного слова, подкрепляемого великой музыкой и изобразительным искусством. Почему эта идея обладает такой высокой выживаемостью? Напомним, что в данном случае «выживаемость» означает не выживание гена в генофонде, а выживание мима в мимофонде. На самом деле вопрос состоит в следующем: в чем та «особость» идеи о Боге, которая придает ей такую стабильность и способность проникать в культурную среду? Выживаемость хорошего мима, входящего в мимофонд, обусловливается его большой психологической привлекательностью. Идея Бога дает на первый взгляд приемлемый ответ на глубокие и волнующие вопросы о смысле существования. Она позволяет надеяться, что несправедливость на этом свете может быть вознаграждена на том свете. «Всегда протянутые руки», готовые поддержать нас в минуты нашей слабости, которые, подобно плацебо, отнюдь не теряют своей действенности, хотя и существуют лишь в нашем воображении. Вот некоторые из причин, по которым идея Бога с такой готовностью копируется последовательными поколениями индивидуальных мозгов. Бог существует, пусть лишь в форме мима с высокой выживаемостью или инфекционностью, в среде, создаваемой человеческой культурой.”

“If religion is true, one must believe. And if one chooses not to believe, one’s choice is marked under the category of a refusal, and is thus never really free: it has the duress of a recoil.” With literary belief, however, “one is always free to choose not to believe.” This, Wood argues, is the freedom of literature; it is what constitutes its “reality.”

“The padres set great store by addressing prayer to personal gods: ‘Genuine prayer exists only in religions in which there is a God as a person and a shape and endowed with a will.’That was stated by a famous Protestant. The anarch does not want to have anything to do with that conception. As for the One God: while he may be able to shape persons, he is not a person himself, and the he is already a patriarchal prejudice.A neuter One is beyond our grasp, while man converses ten with the Many Gods on equal terms, whether as their inventor or as their discoverer. In any case, it is man who named the gods. This is not to be confused with a high level soliloquy. Divinity must, without a doubt, be inside us and recognized as being inside us; otherwise we would have no concept of gods.”