That’s an intriguing response. I’ve written up an article in reply to yours, and indeed the Grand Inquisitor makes an appearance in it, as does Leo Strauss’s interpretation of the double truth doctrine. It’s interesting that you seem to accept this criticism, that esoteric Catholicism could be humanistic and even atheistic.

Your view of centrism seems almost mystical, perhaps Taoist. This brings up the role of God in what seem to me more like political compromises. For instance, if religion should be part of the secular “civilizing” of humanity, as you say, does that mean myths should be made up cynically for the purpose of stabilizing a typically unjust society? What do you make of the difference between what scholars call the historical Jesus and the Christ of faith? Should the latter be promoted pragmatically as a noble lie? Do you think Christianity is based on genuine miracles or is that religion more thoroughly political (secretly Machiavellian or Straussian)?