Serge Lang and categories

I was told that (Serge) Lang has never fallen in love with categories, to use a polite euphemism. Other people claim that, in some occasion, he has even declared his lack of interest in the subject in a somewhat harsh tone. However, I couldn't find anything (explicit) in his work in favor of these claims. Is there any document (a letter, a paper, a book, ...) where one can clearly read about his point of view on category theory? Is there any anecdote or personal episode that you could eventually tell in respect to this?

From p.105 of the first edition of Lang's Algebra, under the heading EXERCISES:

Take any book on homological algebra, and prove all the theorems without looking at the proofs in that book.

Homological alebgra was invented by Eilenberg-MacLane. General category theory (i.e. the theory of arrow-theoretic results) is generally known as abstract nonsense (the terminology is due to Steenrod).

In response to amWhy's comment, I looked at the Revised 3rd edition of the book, where the section on Homological Algebra contains a much kinder but still recognizable version of the above:

In the forties and fifties (mostly in the works of Cartan, Eilenberg, MacLane, and Steenrod, see [CaE 57]), it was realized that there was a systematic way of developing certain relationships of linear algebra, depending only on fairly general constructions which were mostly arrow-theoretic, and were affectionately called abstract nonsense by Steenrod.

According to this MO answer, the quote is unchanged between the first and second editions.