Church's stance on logical contradictions

[zbugg]

I have always believed that logical contradictions are impossible to create, even for God, and I have had this belief reassured by articles/comments on this website. but I still don’t know the church’s
stance on it. if you know could you please give me a citation/reference thank you.

 

[StudentMI]

Welcome to CAF.

 

[Wesrock]

I have always believed that logical contradictions are impossible to create, even for God, and I have had this belief reassured by articles/comments on this website. but I still don’t know the church’s
stance on it. if you know could you please give me a citation/reference thank you.

There’s no dogma that I know of on the issue. The majority opinion I’ve seen from Catholic theologians is that logical contradictions are not possibilities. But you can be a good Catholic and hold that God is prior to logic and can do the logically impossible.

As a fan of St. Thomas Aquinas (who stated that logical contradictions are not possible) I’d point to Summa Theologica, Part 1, Question. 25, Article 3. A few select quotes (from the same section but not immediately consecutive) I’ve pulled from the larger discussion:

I answer that, All confess that God is omnipotent; but it seems difficult to explain in what His omnipotence precisely consists: for there may be doubt as to the precise meaning of the word ‘all’ when we say that God can do all things. If, however, we consider the matter aright, since power is said in reference to possible things, this phrase, “God can do all things,” is rightly understood to mean that God can do all things that are possible; and for this reason He is said to be omnipotent.

It remains therefore, that God is called omnipotent because He can do all things that are possible absolutely; which is the second way of saying a thing is possible. For a thing is said to be possible or impossible absolutely, according to the relation in which the very terms stand to one another, possible if the predicate is not incompatible with the subject, as that Socrates sits; and absolutely impossible when the predicate is altogether incompatible with the subject, as, for instance, that a man is a donkey.

Therefore, everything that does not imply a contradiction in terms, is numbered amongst those possible things, in respect of which God is called omnipotent: whereas whatever implies contradiction does not come within the scope of divine omnipotence, because it cannot have the aspect of possibility. Hence it is better to say that such things cannot be done, than that God cannot do them.

https://www.newadvent.org/summa/1025.htm#article3

 

[zbugg]

Thank you!

 

[MJCarzon]

I don’t know of any official Church teaching, but even if one wasn’t Catholic/Christian, he would realize that logical contradictions fall flat on their face. Thus, even an atheist could not hold to a logical contradiction in good faith.

 

[Kramgen]

Some things are beyond human understanding, just not logic. God cannot do anything illogical.

 

[zbugg]

I understand this and i agree, what I’m wondering is what the church’s stance on the issue is

 

[Weave]

I think the best answer you are going to get has already been posted. Tough to get better than Aquinas when it comes to logic.

 

[Dovekin]

John Paul II’s Fides et Ratio covers this I think.

And then there is Abelard. Prologue to Sic et Non by Peter Abelard addresses a similar situation, where two statements seem to contradict one another. This is indistinguishable from the situation where they do contradict. Some Catholics have tried to reject Abelard, but this method was taught from the beginning of Scholasticism.

When, in such a quantity of words, some of the writings of the saints seem not only to differ from, but even to contradict, each other, one should not rashly pass judgement concerning those by whom the world itself is to be judged, as it is written: " The saints shall judge nations " (cf. Wisdom 3: 7-8), and again " You also shall sit as judging " (cf. Matthew 19:28). Let us not presume to declare them liars or condemn them as mistaken – those people of whom the Lord said " He who hears you, hears me; and he who rejects you, rejects me " (Luke 10:16). Thus with our weakness in mind, let us believe that we lack felicity in understanding rather than that they lack felicity in writing –- those of whom the Truth Himself said: " For it is not you who are speaking, but the Spirit of your Father who speaks through you " (Matthew 10:20). So, since the Spirit through which these things were written and spoken and revealed to the writers is itself absent from us, why should it be surprising if we should also lack an understanding of these same things?
Peter Abelard. Prologue to Sic et Non

 

[Genesis315]

I have always believed that logical contradictions are impossible to create, even for God, and I have had this belief reassured by articles/comments on this website. but I still don’t know the church’s
stance on it. if you know could you please give me a citation/reference thank you.

I think the First Vatican Council’s dogmatic constitution on faith, Dei Filius addresses this. Start at Chapter 4 On Faith and Reason in the link below:

https://www.ewtn.com/catholicism/library/first-vatican-council-1505

Here is a relevant excerpt:

1. Even though faith is above reason, there can never be any real disagreement between faith and reason, since it is the same God who reveals the mysteries and infuses faith, and who has endowed the human mind with the light of reason.
2. God cannot deny himself, nor can truth ever be in opposition to truth. The appearance of this kind of specious contradiction is chiefly due to the fact that either the dogmas of faith are not understood and explained in accordance with the mind of the Church, or unsound views are mistaken for the conclusions of reason.
3. Therefore we define that every assertion contrary to the truth of enlightened faith is totally false [34].

 

[Abrosz]

The contradictions are re-classified as “mysteries”. How conveeeenient!

 

[Gorgias]

The contradictions are re-classified as “mysteries”. How conveeeenient!

Science does the same thing, though. For things about which we don’t have knowledge (or, as in this case, seem contradictory), scientists shrug their shoulders and say “we don’t know.” Light is a particle and a wave. How’s that possible? Einstein wrote:

It seems as though we must use sometimes the one theory and sometimes the other, while at times we may use either. We are faced with a new kind of difficulty. We have two contradictory pictures of reality; separately neither of them fully explains the phenomena of light, but together they do.

It’s a contradiction! It’s a mystery! How conveeeenient!