Stigmata of the Enigmata – or, the Catholics, and Leonardo


Christian is a Philosopher that comes from Belgium. What identifies him the most and above all is simplicity, for everything is better with “vanilla ice cream.” Perhaps, for this reason, his intellectual passion is criticism and irony, in the sense of trying to reveal what “hides behind the mask,” and give birth to the true. For him, ignorance and knowledge never “cross paths.” What he likes the most in his leisure time, is to go for a walk with his wife.

Scott Douglas Jacobsen: Insofar as some reasonably substantive historical work displays the personality of Leonardo (Da Vinci), we can stipulate some probabilities about the man: gay or male homosexual, left-handed, vegetarian, wore purple and pink tunics, polymath, wrote in reverse to the norm of culture then and now, illegitimate child, no real last name, son of a notary father and peasant mother, an empiricist-logician without formal education or schooling, and some formal training in the arts under Andrea del Verrocchio, and, of course, without equal amongst contemporaries. Any thoughts on Leonardo Da Vinci? (Personally: an eminently lovable person.)

Dr. Christian Sorensen: Along with sustaining the eminence of Leonardo da Vinci, I think that it is necessary, to reaffirm its enigmatic and progressive personality, all of which stands out overwhelmingly, with respect to the generality of his time and of our days, nevertheless, not everything can be inclusive, if of what is talking about, is its homosexuality, which from my point of view, and contrary to what Freud argued, was not a repressed desire. Indeed, it was conscious enough, to have lived it, at the same level of his other desires, and then, unlike its other qualities, it would have followed the same fate, that the one is followed currently, in the sense of going unnoticed, which is what I believe that happens, to the vast majority of men, when they put into play, their masculinity, through what I will name as heterocuriosity, that strictly speaking, it is a camouflaged bisexuality, which I consider to be structurally constitutive, both physically and psychologically, therefore ultimately represents anyway, and no matter in what context it takes place, a facet of homosexuality. In this sense, for me, and from a metaphorical perspective, Da Vinci’s kind of homosexual latency, becomes by analogy, not in what most believe as genial creativity, but in what for me has to do with a creative genius, that expresses in itself, by showing and hiding at the same time, as if it was a divinity, what I think it’s his writing with crooked lines. Due to the above, I believe that Da Vinci, was the first to have the intention, of creating an underlying mystery, foundable within the expressed message of its work, and containing as such, what I will denominate as achieved significance of the word, which is going to be related, in turn, with something external to the work itself, while the external to which it refers, will also be implicitly present in it. The aforementioned, suggests also, the fact of discovering, that his main value, from my point of view, is a sort of game of interactions, that’s being displayed between the symbol and their hidden meanings, which lastly enables to conclude, that there’s an inexhaustibility, that places Da Vinci and his work, in something equivalent to what would be the place of the universe, where the only findable limit, is the reason.

Jacobsen: Da Vinci commonly repeated himself. Prismatic lessons in orbit around the same orb. For example, compare the three quotations here:

  • These scholars strut around in a pompous way, without any thoughts of their own, equipped only with the thoughts of others, and they want to stop me from having my own thoughts. And if they despise me for being an inventor, then how much more should they be despised for not being inventors, but followers and reciters of the works of others.
  • Although I cannot quote from authors in the same way they do, I shall rely on a much worthier thing, actual experience, which is the only thing that could ever have properly guided the men that they learn from.
  • I am well aware that because I did not study the ancients, some foolish men will accuse me of being uneducated. They will say that because I did not learn from their schoolbooks, I am unqualified to express an opinion. But I would reply that my conclusions are drawn from firsthand experience, unlike the scholars who only believe what they read in books written by others.

He would make a poor academic. For the formally uneducated with unmeasurable talents, what seems like the sensibility to less capable others with prestige, title, and connections for Da Vinci?

Sorensen: I think that it causes nausea, since the nothingness of being is fully revealed, as an act of fatuous sincerity, that is to say, nothing is not present, as negation, in the sense of absence, as occurs with the immeasurable ignorance, but instead, what happens is equivalent to a doctoral ignorance, where an absent presence is produced, since something present, presents itself as such, at the same time, that it becomes an absence, by double negation, because what is shown as evidence, is actually being hidden, and therefore, it’s not presented, meanwhile on the other hand, what seems like evidence, is not perceived as such.

Jacobsen: Any favourite quotations properly attributed to Da Vinci?

Sorensen: Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication.

Jacobsen: What seems like the true philosophical stance of Da Vinci on God, the Bible, religion, theology, the sciences, Christianity, and nature, reality Itself?

Sorensen: The fact that precisely, reality in itself, is the only true thing, since from his point of view, all knowledge, should be born from experience, and from the perception of the senses, therefore, if any reality is not empirical, then it shouldn’t be assumed as existent, and in consequence, no knowledge, that doesn’t have its origin in the latter, can be either accepted as truth. Not for nothing, Da Vinci says, that when he meets God, he will claim him, for all the faults that exist within the world, which in my opinion means then, that God could not have created nothing, since then something, would not work correctly, between God and its perfection, in consequent its entity neither does exist, nor would there be any conversation between both. In more tangible terms, I think that just as Da Vinci despised metaphysics, due to its unmeaningful etherealness, in the same way, he also felt an allergy with theology, that was further projected towards the clergy, by denouncing them as corrupts, and by calling to disobey their authority, through its works.

Jacobsen: Any thoughts on the Catholic funeral for Da Vinci?

Sorensen: Regarding Da Vinci’s funeral in itself, I can only say, that many myths have been woven, and that there are more uncertainties than assurances about it, however, especially around his death, and in relation to its testament, left to the notary of Amboise, draws the attention, the fact that Da Vinci, had requested, three solemn Masses, with deacon and sub-deacon, and thirty Gregorian Masses, without chorus. Regarding its desire, plenty of things may be said, though from my perspective, what actually is emphasized, is the symbolic meaning of number three, that for me means knowledge, in the Hebrew sense of the word emet as truth, which signifies without death, and that as such, was repeated three times. Therefore, if the presence of the priest is taken into consideration, then I will propose as an interpretation, the appearance of number thirty-three, which coincides in turn, with the age that Jesus had when he died, while the masses without singing, are related with what for me, is the metaphor of the holy Grail, and not, with what is the holy Grail in itself, since it belongs to the sacred enigma, of which its secret, along with having circulated between different depositaries, has been split into parts, that individually, do not say anything about themselves, except if they are completely assembled, which then, is going to imply a certain knowledge, that is not only hidden, but also, that’s lost in time, because it refers to a lineage, already assimilated, and therefore, untraceable.

Jacobsen: Regarding the (Roman) Catholics, what are the bases for their faith?

Sorensen: I think, that the faith of Roman Catholicism, is a faith without bases, since it refers to a reality, which is not real, at the same time, that it has always tried to erase the traces of all it, that is to say, of the reality that regards Jesus and Mary Magdalene. The last, has been in that way, from the medieval crusades, through the Renaissance and modern-day with the witch hunts, among which, I believe, that Leonardo Da Vinci was a victim, and until now, where the probable current murders, who are seeking to destroy, any evidence, related to the depositaries of the sacred enigma, by carrying out, from the darkness, and with the protection of their sacramental secrecy, silencing conspiracies, that hide behind organizations, such as the Opus Dei, since in that way, they continue maintaining a hierarchical, patriarchal and anti-egalitarian power structure, which ultimately, does nothing more, than to reaffirm their intolerance, and what I am going to name, as the supposed exclusivism of their Christian faith, that’s exactly the opposite, of what it is for me, the liberating egalitarianism of the feminine principle, represented by Maria Magadalena and by the primordial pagan goddesses, to whom this Jewish woman, would somehow be assimilated.

Jacobsen: What seem like the good, the neutral, and the bad of their faith?

Sorensen: I think, that the bad thing about their faith, is that it exists, meanwhile, the neutral issue, is that it is an empty faith, because as such, it says absolutely nothing, therefore, the good news about it, would be, that this and its Roman Catholic Church, may collapse and disappear promptly, since with doing so, for the first time, they would be making something for the commonwealth of humanity.

Jacobsen: What were some close social and professional entanglements with Opus Dei and the Vatican for you? What were the lessons from the experience?

Sorensen: I did my philosophy studies, at the Ponticia Università della Santa Croce in Rome, which is physically located in the Palazzo di Sant’Apollinare, since the 14th century, and which was in practice, the old College of Cardinals, where for example, the anti-Pope Benedict XIII, the Nazi Pope Pius XII, and the Pope of the Second Vatican Council, John XXIII, studied. While I was studying, the Opus Dei, offered me to do, a second doctorate in psychology in Germany, and they wanted me to work, in Spain and the United States, with two world-renowned psychiatrists, Aquilino Polaino and Alexander Lyford Pyke, respectively. Simultaneously with the last, they gave me the possibility, of accessing to a sort of secret library, with documents and texts that belonged to the Roman Catholic Church, since the 11th century, and which have been for hundreds of years, forbidden literature for everyone, other than a select group of ecclesiastical authorities, therefore I was the exception to this rule. Indeed, regarding these readings, I had to take an oath, in front of a commission of clergy, under penalty of excommunication, in case that I dared to disclose the content of them. My stay in Rome, allowed me to maintain a physical closeness and friendship, with both the Vatican and the Opus Dei, because in fact, I lived in via Aurelia 145, which was an exclusive condominium, for the diplomatic staff of several embassies, and was located meters from the perimeter wall of the Vatican, at the same time, that I also strengthened close ties, among others, with Joaquin Navarro Valls, who was the spokesman for twenty-two years, during the pontificate of John Paul II, and with Monsignor Mariano Fazio, who is the future successor, of the current prelate of the Opus Dei. In addition to the above, I had the opportunity, to get to know the Vatican banking, since its director of finance, Piero Bagio, to whom I arrived recommended by someone of the Opus Dei, was the person who opened my personal account, in the Ambrosian bank. If I had accepted, all the chances the Opus Dei gave me, with all certainty, I would have assured my existence, from a financial and professional point of view, nevertheless as a counterpart, I would have had to be satisfied, with the will of flying like a poultry, which in concrete would have meant, to sell my soul and spirit, in exchange for wealthness, question to which, I actually was not and I am not willing to do. On the other hand, I wanted to have a training in metaphysics, and from that point of view, I think that the most optimal way to do it, was in a pontifical university with ecclesiastical orientation, that as well, is found in the crib of the Roman Catholic Church, therefore, this was for me, the most suitable place for achieving the goal, not only for all the aforementioned, but also because I think, that the best place, where a bird can take refuge, so as not to be spotted by a hawk, is by hiding under his wings.

Jacobsen: Why is Roman Catholicism one of the most dominant faith sects in the world now?

Sorensen: Because it is the only religious sect, that delivers certainties. All other religions and sects, propose the existence of a sort of silver cord, between God and man, which would allow a communication without intermediaries, though the counterpart, would be that this kind of bond, implies the fact of not knowing or to not recognize the will of God, and therefore, to be unaware, of if the soul, is worthy of enjoying the eternal beatitudes, regarding which, this sect would be its guardian executor, since represents, God on earth, and feels with the empowerment, to redeem sins, what from an underlying point of view, demonstrates, the reason of why this faith, is based on what I will denominate as double self-referentiality, due to the fact, that everything turns, in first person, around them, regardless of whether they are clergy or not. In consequence, generally, they are sort of insatiable black holes, that are waiting to be filled, with goodness, by God. Their neighbors, instead, only exists as scarlet covered steps, waiting to be trampled, for ascending towards heaven. Therefore, in my opinion, the Roman Catholic Church, is a sect, that by excellence, exalts the disordered desire for oneself, and occupies it, like a hook, for a huge majority, at the same time that exhibits, what for me is their facilitist attribute, since together with lacking any intellectual exigency, because almost all of their beliefs and precepts, are empty of any rational basis, and the few of them, which are considered by the clergy, as preambles of faith, because they would have some degree of explicability, actually what they follow, are tautological forms of reasoning, that lead them to chase their tails, just like a perturbated dog does with his. Obviously then, it is not surprising, that they make montages of realities, loaded with magical thoughts, which undoubtedly and for sure, may reach the heart of more than someone, especially if they are supported, by images full of luminous rays, that show languishing faces with blank stares. Deep down, nevertheless, they lack the most important, which is the history, a coherent story, able to account phenomenologically, of the existence of a subject within it.

Jacobsen: What was the work of the Roman Catholics in regards to fighting against anti-Semitism and fighting to further entrench and participate in anti-Semitism?

Sorensen: I think that both, are two sides of the same coin, which is the same strategy, currently followed, with their declarations of love, towards homosexual unions. Historically speaking, the Roman Catholic Church, has always been cynically anti-Semitic, since for them there is a historical crime and sin, due to the crucifixion of Jesus, with respect to which, the Jewish people is guilty, and therefore, would have to pay eternally, with the pain that rejection produces, and with the deaths, that the persecutions entail, nevertheless is in turn, another justification for punishing them, because they didn’t recognize, in the person of Jesus, the figure of the Messiah. In the same manner, according to their bizarre way of thinking, Jews would still cling to a doctrinal error, that they proudly defend, through their over-intellectualizations of the sacred scriptures, and consequently, by contributing, to maintain the world plunged into darkness, for not reaching the true faith. The aforementioned, suggests, that Jews should be silently fought, as enemies of the faith in Jesus Christ, however they forget, that the above is a kind of guiltness, that the lame man attributes to the pavement, because he is not able to walk through, since lastly what they’re preventing is that the Catholic world, gets to know the real true story, due to the fact, that this, would lead to the collapse of the Catholic Church. In conclusion, what they actually feel, is that they have no way to defend themselves, from the cornerstone that’s undermining the foundations of their feigned faith, therefore, the only thing left for them, is to use anti-Semitism as a threat for Jews, at the same time that they use Jews, as a threat for the rest of the world, nevertheless from my point of view, they lose sight, that the threat, is the weapon of who first feels threatened.

Jacobsen: What are the typical forms of argument of the Roman Catholics? What refutes to near certainty or in totality?

Sorensen: The Roman Catholic Church, sustains itself, through arguments, that have the form of apodypic certainties, which means, that they do not admit, any type of refutations, because the last would suppose, a discursive confrontation, which in turn, would give the option to reject a specific argument, and the last, does not happen with the apodictic reasoning, since it is equivalent to an absolute, that is imposed, by its querulous force, which is derived in parallel, from an authoritarianism, and not from a discursive force. Similarly, these kinds of arguments, take dichotomous forms, in order to polarize their meanings to the extreme, due to the fact, of being unable to integrate opposing elements, for forming afterwards, coherent wholes, and therefore, by the employment of a dualistic thinking, they tend to pigeonhole them, with rigid moral categories of good and evil, since they are incapable to resolve any cognitive dissonance, arising from apparent contradictory elements, due to the reason, that they’re incapable of accessing, towards what I will name as formal thinking. In consequence, they remain within a sensitive stage of thought, that at times, is only able of carrying out concrete operations, which never get to the complete abstraction of something.

Jacobsen: Thank you for the opportunity and your time, Dr. Sorensen.

Sorensen: You’re welcome, Mr. Jacobsen.

Photo by Mika Baumeister on Unsplash

Leave a Reply