# A Father Brown question

**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-father-brown-question/778908
**Category:** Cafe Society
**Created:** [February 3, 2017, 2:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-father-brown-question/778908 "2017-02-03T14:49:33Z")
**Posts on this page:** 1
**Page:** 2

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![foolsguinea](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foolsguinea/32/14751_2.png) [@foolsguinea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/foolsguinea)
#### Post date: [February 6, 2017, 6:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-father-brown-question/778908/21 "2017-02-06T06:54:33Z")

</div>

I don’t know if I ever thought about it this way, but here goes:

Logic is actually really important to theology. The material sciences can rely on empiricism to some degree; they probably tolerate fuzzy logic, false identities, and a total lack of critical thinking pretty well if observational data gets them back to reality. Theology lacks much empirical data, so it largely lives on logic.

Ganesha’s existence isn’t _illogical._ Neither is transubstantiation. Those may be untrue. The outsider may find them fantastic, incredible, and head-shakingly weird. But to call them illogical is a failure to understand critical distinctions. The logical is not the same as the real. Something can be entirely unreal and completely internally consistent.

[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-father-brown-question/778908.md?page=1)