234
PARTISAN REVIEW
science is an instrument, not a goal; it is not even a meaningful in–
strument in
all
fields of human study. To venerate the "scientific at–
titude of mind" is one of the philosophical errors that have made
it possible for Communism to rationalize the worst tyranny in
history in the name of "scientific materialism."
No, the "scientific .attitude of mind" is not being forsaken by
religious people who know what science is. And if "drastic" limits
are being set to it (not actually what is happening at all, but rather
a more thoughtful inclusion of science within our cultural frame–
work), it is because "science" itself is no longer deified, as nature can
no longer be deified, and this is all to the good.
3. "Can culture exist without a positive religion?" Yes, it does,
very tensely and precariously, and with more and more talk about
culture, and less and less culture. For the first time, too, there has
grown up an elaborate mass pseudo-culture, plus a frightening
antagonism to genuine culture, which organized religion can no
longer challenge, only imitate, in order to survive as an institution.
Religion as an institution is actually one of many now competing for
men's loyalties; it is often a political expression, and if it is the state
religion-as in Israel, Ireland, Italy, Spain- is usually a reactionary
force that is antagonistic to the free development of culture, one
of whose aspects should be a genuine and individually felt religious
consciousness.
Obviously, then, I do believe in "prophetic" rather than in
"institutional" religion; and, moreover, that the central and endur–
ing values do stem from, even where they are no longer consciously
tied to, the prophetic tradition of Judaism and Christianity. It is
impossible to
explain,
however easier it may be to uphold, democracy
without reference to those cardinal conceptions of the sanctity of
individual life and the brotherhood of man that come to us from
the prophetic tradition.
On the other hand, those who "justify religion as a social in–
stitution ... as a means of social discipline," are usually very bad
Christians (like Maurras himself), yet not necessarily totalitarian.
For totalitarianism is different in
kind
from all other political creeds,
not just "reactionary"; and only the most wilfully obtuse "progres–
sives" can say that the authoritarian structure of the Roman Catholic
Church makes it everywhere "as bad as" totalitarianism. Many
