"I have been rightly told that it [my pride] will die fifteen minutes after I do."

      St. Bernadette Soubirous to Jeanne Védère, René Laurentin, Bernadette vous parle, 2 vols. (Paris:  Lethielleux, 1972), vol. 1, p. 354, as quoted in René Laurentin, Bernadette of Lourdes:  a life based on authenticated documents, trans. from Vie de Bernadette (Desclee de Brouwer, 1978) by John Drury (Minneapolis, MN:  Winston Press, 1979), 206.

"very stupid and unworthy things on the subject of women"

Polygamia triumphatrix
(1682), p. 123

      "On the sex of souls and on the image of God in the souls of women we have . . . alluded to some [important] discussions anterior to the second Council of Mâcon [held in 585].  We sought only to indicate trajectories of research, cite some recent studies, and, at the same time, suggest a larger context for the polemics to which so many have devoted themselves [(on s'est livre)] not unwillingly, [and] in the 19^th century above all, although the arrows flew low:  'perfidious falsification', 'blunder', 'enormity', 'Voltairean jokes', 'ridiculous objection', 'ludicrous tradition', 'scholars of contraband [(savants de contraband)]'.  On the precise terrain on which they fought, the Catholic apologists were right.  [It is] a matter of fact that there has not existed, in the history of Christianity, a legend as unfounded and [yet] tenacious [(aussi tenace et aussi mal fondée)] as that of the Council of Mâcon, with the possible exception of that—a legend not unlike it in character—of the She-Pope Joan.

     "And yet, the refutations, perfectly justified in themselves, were accompanied by triumphalist declarations that have not contributed to a decontamination of the atmosphere. . . .

     "We would prefer, rather, to hear from [the likes of] the distinguished Jesuit Max Pribilla, who noted in a [far] humbler tone [that] 'Over the centuries there certainly have also been Catholic theologians who said [(ont soutenu)] very stupid and unworthy [things] on the subject of women. . . .'  (Although [Pribilla] did add, in effect, [that] one cannot, all the same, impute to them a debate over the existence in them of a soul!)"

          Émilien Lamirande, "De l'âme des femmes:  autour d'un faux anniversaire," Science et esprit 37, no. 3 (1985):  350-351 (335-352).  It's pretty easy to find solid information in English on the Council of Mâcon.  See, for example, Michael Nolan:  First things, New Blackfriars, etc.

Pseudo-Ulysses S. Grant? "there are three political parties in the United States: the Republican, the Democratic, and the Methodist Church."

Here's what I've found so far.  Search hits dropped off the map behind 1900, and in the low-hanging 19th- (and even early 20th-) century newspaper/magazine fruit in the University of Washington databases, too.  Significantly, perhaps, I also encountered "three political parties in the United States"/"this country"-references with "Temperance" or "Prohibition" in that third or "Methodist" slot.  (So one could see how this could have been a variation on an established trope, or vice versa.)  I would welcome any substantive additions, but the historians I've consulted do little more than cite each other, IF anything at all:

• 1837-1885:  The papers of Ulysses S. Grant, ed. John Y. Simon et al. for the Ulysses S. Grant Association, 32 vols. (Carbondale and Edwardsville, IL:  Southern Illinois University Press, 1967-2012):  I searched all 32 volumes on 1) Methodism (which returned, I think, zero hits in 32 volumes), 2) Methodist, and 3) Methodists on the assumption that one of those three words would capture a reference to a statement such as this one.  I also checked 4) the formal published index to each volume under Methodis*, but to no avail.  Not a single occurrence that could be interpreted as even an allusion to such a statement so far as I could see, not even in the editorial notes that supply tons of background information not contained in the Papers themselves.  I did not try phrase searches for either "Episcopal Church" or "M. E. Church", because Methodist should have captured all of the former, and because the printed indices (under Methodis*) were capturing them anyway, so far as I could see.  (Also the search feature didn’t work well for phrase searching, indeed was wildly unreliable for phrases composed of abbreviations like "M. E. Church".) 
• 1885-1886:  Ulysses S. Grant, Personal memoirs:  no hits on Methodis*.
• 1900 June 7:  "The canteen question" (the Anti-Canteen Bill), under "American affairs," Public Opinion 28, no. 23 (Thursday, June 7, 1900):  708, citing the New York Evening post:  "It used to be said in President Grant’s time that there were three political parties in this country—Republicans, Democrats and Methodists—these three, and the greatest of these is the Methodists."
• 1900 July-December:  "Temperance at the General Convention," under "Religious and Missionary Intelligence," Methodist magazine and review 52 (July-December 1900):  189, citing the New York Evening post:  "It used to be said in President Grant’s time that there were three political parties in this country:  Republicans, Democrats and Methodists—these three, and the greatest of these is the Methodists."
• 1927:  William Armstrong Fairburn, Prohibition:  being the last five chapters of a larger work entitled Justice and law (New York, Nation Press Print. Co., [1927]), 217, citing nothing:  "Some fifty years after General Grant made the pithy remark that 'in the United States there are three political parties, the Republican, the Democratic, and the Methodist Church,' we find the last named", etc.
• 1928:  George Coes Howell, The case of whiskey (1928), 76, citing nothing:  "is proved by [Grant’s] statement that 'In the United States there are three political parties, the Republican, the Democratic and the Methodist Church'" (italics Howell's).
• 1931:  Proceedings of the Sixth Ecumenical Methodist Conference held in Wesley Memorial Church, Atlanta, Ga., October 16-25, 1931 (London:  The Epworth Press (J. Alfred Sharp), 409, citing no one, not even Grant:  "Let it not be said with truth, as has been charged, that there are three political parties in the United States:  the Republican, the Democratic, and the Methodist Church."
• 1933:  Walter B. Posey, The Development of Methodism in the Old Southwest, 1783-1824 (Tuscaloosa, AL: Weatherford, 1933), 1, citing nothing clearly:  "130 years after Wesley’s conversion Ulysses Simpson Grant said that in the United States there were three political parties, the Republican, the Democratic, and the Methodist Church."  Closest footnote (no. 1) is to this page, which doesn't mention Grant, but I suppose the claim could have been picked out of one of the sources cited by Posey later on this same page (no. 1).
• 1934:  Review of Posey (1933), above, Journal of American history 28 (1934):  185, citing nothing, but probably Posey:  "President Grant once declared that there were three political Parties in the United States:  the Republican, the Democratic, and the Methodist Church."
• 1935:  William Best Hesseltine, Ulysses S. Grant, politician ([New York:  Dodd, Mead and Company, 1935]), 305, citing _____:  "Legend has it that he once remarked the presence of three parties in the country—Republicans, Democrats and Methodists."  This book is still listed in the bibliography to the entry on Grant in the current online edition of the Encyclopaedia Britannica, an entry authored by editor of the 1837-1885 Papers John Y. Simon.  So one of the citations in footnote no. 38 could be the one we're looking for:
  

  ·       Cramer, Conversations and unpublished letters, 179.  Nothing on p. 179.  Nothing of relevance when searched on Methodism, Methodist, and Methodists.
  ·       Jay Cooke to Chandler, Nov 10 1868, Chandler MSS, Library of Congress
  ·       New York Tribune, Dec 24 1868
  ·       New York Tribune, Mar 6 1869
  ·       New York Tribune, Aug 22 1870
  ·       New York Tribune, Sep 19 1872
  ·       New York Tribune, Dec 8 1875
  ·       National republican [Washington, D.C.], Mar 4 1869.
  

  o   Ed. 1

  o   Ed. 2

  ·       National republican [Washington, D.C.], Jul 20 1871.  Unavailable on the LC site.
  ·       Badeau, Grant in peace, 161.  Nothing on p. 161.  Nothing of relevance when searched on Methodism, Methodist, and Methodists.
  ·       Porter to Cabinet, Oct 15, 1870, Grant Letter Book, Library of Congress
  ·       J. N. Davis to Washburne, Nov 6 1879, Washburne MSS, Library of Congress

• 1949:  Virginius Dabney, Dry Messiah:  the Life of Bishop Cannon ([New York:  Alfred A. Knopf, 1949]), 38, citing no one:  "Without the Methodists and the Baptists [the nascent Anti-Saloon League] could never have made appreciable headway.  President Grant had recognized the puissance of the Methodists years before when he made his famous observation that there were 'three political parties' in the United States—The Republican Party, the Democratic Party, 'and the Methodist Church.'"
• 1969:  Thomas B. Littlewood, Horner of Illinois, (Evanston, IL:  Northwestern University Press, 1969), 117-118:  in Google Books' snippet view, a false positive.  Representative Lyons:  "'There are,' he suggested, 'three political parties in the United States—Republicans, Democrats, and the Social Workers party, which is subsidized by the Democrats.'"
• 1972/1974:  Methodist history 11/12 (1972/1974):  11.  I have been unable to locate this one (flagged by Google) in any issue dated 1972-1974, though I downloaded, examined, and searched them all, I hope effectively.
• 1975:  Richard Goldhurst, Many are the hearts:  the agony and the triumph of Ulysses S. Grant (New York:  Reader's Digest Press, 1975), 189, citing nothing:  "When a delegation of ministers called in 1872 to let Grant know they might endorse his nomination, the General said there were three political parties in America—Republicans, Democrats, and Methodists."
• 1983:  Robert H. Keller, American Protestantism and United States Indian Policy, 1869-82 (Lincoln:  University of Nebraska Press, 1983), 36-37:  an attribution to Grant without quotation marks or a citation of any kind.
• 1984 October:  Bruce David Forbes, "'And obey God, Etc': Methodism and American Indians," Methodist history 23, no. 1 (October 1984):  23 (3-24), quoting Keller (1983), above:  "'Grant himself once remarked that there were three political parties in the United States:  the Republicans, the Democrats, and the Methodists.'"
• 1993:  William Gravely, "African Methodisms and the Rise of Black Denominationalism," in Russell E. Richey, Kenneth E. Rowe, and Jean Miller Schmidt, eds., Perspectives on American Methodism:  interpretive essays (Nashville, TN:  Kingswood Books, 1993), 125 and 226, citing Keller (1983), above:
• 2000:  Richard Carwardine, "Methodists, politics, and the coming of the American Civil War," Church history 69, no. 3 (September 2000):  578 (578-609), citing Posey (1933), above:
• 2001:  Richard Carwardine, "Methodists, politics, and the coming of the American Civil War," in Nathan O. Hatch and John H. Wigger, eds., Methodism and the shaping of American culture (Nashville, TN:  Kingswood Books, 2001), 309, citing Posey (1933), above:
• 2005:  David Hempton, Methodism: empire of the spirit (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2005), 253, citing Carwardine (2001), above:  
• 2011:  Charles Bracelen Flood, Grant's final victory:  Ulysses S. Grant's heroic last year (Cambridge, MA:  DeCapo Press, 2011), 148, citing Richard Goldhurst, Many are the hearts:  the agony and the triumph of Ulysses S. Grant (New York:  Reader's Digest Press, 1975), 189:  "When a delegation of ministers called on Grant at the White House in 1872, he told them that there were three political parties in America—Republicans, Democrats, and Methodists."
• 2013:  Nancy M. Beasley, The Underground Railroad in DeKalb County, Illinois (Jefferson, NC:  McFarland & Co., Inc., Publishers, 2013), 113, citing "Education 2000 Inc., Landmarks of Faith:  Methodist Camp Meetings":  "Actually, there are three political parties in the United States, Democrats, Republicans, and Methodists."
• 2014:  Mark R. Teasdale, Methodist evangelism, American salvation:  the home missions of the Methodist Episcopal Church, 1860-1920 (Eugene, OR:  Pickwick Publications, 2014), 32, citing Cawardine, above:  "During his presidency, Ulysses S. Grant is said to have remarked that 'there were three great parties in the United States:  the Republican, the Democratic, and the Methodist Church.'"
  
• 2016:  Ronald C. White, American Ulysses:  a life of Ulysses S. Grant (New York:  Random House, 2016), 491, citing Keller (1983):  "Grant once declared there were 'three political parties in the United States:  the Republicans, the Democrats, and the Methodists.'"

With thanks to Douglas M. Strong for the diversion.

"Because we very often make these choices under the influence of others, on whose authority we buy the official story, it is not surprising that lots of people have thought of their conversion [to unbelief] as science-driven, even perhaps in the most dramatic form."

     Charles Taylor, A secular age (Cambridge, MA:  The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2007), 568-569.

"even when [people] come to feel [the immanent frame] as obviously supporting closure, this doesn't constitute a valid argument. The sense of 'obvious' closure [against transcendence] is not a perception of rational grounding, but an illusion of . . . 'spin'. . . . [W]hile the norms and practices of the immanent frame may incline to closure, this neither decides the effect that living within the frame in fact will have on us, nor even less does it justify the closed take."

      Charles Taylor, A secular age (Cambridge, MA:  The Belknap Press of Harvard University, 2007), 555.

"The issue here is not how many positive invocations of the body we hear"

      "But leaving these aspects and counter-movements aside, official Christianity has gone through what we can call an 'excarnation', a transfer out of embodied, 'enfleshed' forms of religious life, to those which are more 'in the head'.  In this it follows in parallel with 'Enlightenment', and modern unbelieving culture in general.  The issue here is not how many positive invocations of the body we hear; these abound in many forms of atheist materialism, as also in more Liberal Christianity.  The issue is whether our relation to the highest—God for believers, generally morality for unbelieving Aufklärer—is mediated in embodied form, as was plainly the case for parishioners 'creeping to the Cross' on Good Friday in pre-Reformation England.  Or looking to what moves us towards the highest, the issue to what degree our highest desires, those which allow us to discern the highest, are embodied, as the pity captured in the New Testament verb 'splangnizesthai' plainly is."

     Charles Taylor, A secular age (Cambridge, MA:  The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2007), 554.

A flat or bemused tolerance, as it were, but no fraternal correction

"The emperor Marcus Aurelius (AD 121-180) gives a similar instruction on how to deal with someone who behaves rudely in the gymnasium:  'We keep an eye on him, not though as an enemy  nor from suspicion of him but with good-humored avoidance [(καίτοι φυλαττόμεθα, οὐ μέντοι ὡς ἐχθρόν οὐδὲ μεθ' ὑποψίας, ἀλλ' ἐκκλίσεως εὐμενοῦς)]' (Med. 6.20).  Unlike Paul, however, Aurelius demonstrates no interest in the reform of this offensive person and 'recognizes no duty of remonstrance towards the offender ὡς ἀδελφόν' ([as a brother; ]Moffatt 1901)."

     Jeffrey A. D. Weima on 2 Thess 3:6-15, 1-2 Thessalonians, Baker exegetical commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI:  Baker Academic, 2014), 627, but without Weima’s transliteration and more of the Greek (which I have taken from pp. 140-141 of the 1916 LCL edition ed. and trans. Haines).  Underscoring and boldface mine.
     Marcus Aurelius is invoking the dirty competitor figuratively:  "Act much in the same way in all the other parts of life.  Let us make many allowances for our fellow-athletes as it were.  Avoidance is always possible [(ἔξεστι . . . ἐκκλίνειν)], as I have said, without suspicion or hatred."
     And so a flat or bemused tolerance, as it were, but no fraternal correction.