To be sure;
Sauwelios:
“One shall be harder against Protestants than against Catholics, harder against liberal Protestants than against firmly believing ones. The criminality in being a Christian increases in the measure that one approaches science. The criminal of criminals is consequently the [Christian] philosopher .” (The Antichrist , “Law against Christianity”.)
And:
“Definition of Protestantism: the hemiplegia [half-sided paralysis] of Christianity—and of reason…” (AC 10.)
Reason (science, philosophy) paralyzes Christianity and Christianity paralyzes reason.
This would mean, however, that in order to be a good Catholic, you’d have to waive any and all claims to being rational or scientific; you’d have to believe the dogma on authority alone; your conscience would have to bite you for even asking for reasons!
But;
Sauwelios:
“The antinatural is natural to the mind of humanity” (Lampert, Nietzsche’s Teaching , page 228): this means that “the basic will of the mind”, which is “divinized into the most artful of beings, divine womanliness [i.e., Ariadne]”, is a will not to know nature; whereas “the contrary will of the mind”, which is “divinized into a philosopher god, divine manliness” (op.cit., page 234), is a natural will against that natural will against nature. Wendy is an abomination inasmuch as she represents the hemiplegia of these two natures, male and female human nature.
“These two classes of men are always upon earth, & they should be enemies: whoever tries to reconcile them seeks to destroy existence.
Blake can simply say “religion” because Christianity (Catholicism) itself is already a liberalisation, a perversion of the completely natural, completely irrational: tribal animism.
(Quote source: https://ilovephilosophy.com/viewtopic.php?p=2673589#p2673589 )