Last year I wrote a brief article about intellectual modesty, and my point was that truths of faith are not necessarily subject to comprehension by human reason. Our intellectual powers cannot rise above nature to the supernatural.
Here is a personal example. The Catechism has this to say about the Eucharist:
The signs of bread and wine become, in a way surpassing understanding, the Body and Blood of Christ… [CCC §1333, emphasis added]
Transubstantiation surpasses my understanding. When I first read Aquinas on the subject I did not find his presentation to be comprehensible nor persuasive. But what occurred to me was that neither of those were necessary things. What I know to be a fact is that it is a truth of the Faith, and therefore I know that it is true whether I understand it or can explain it.
We must not presume to subject God’s truth to human judgment. He is infinite and perfect; we are the very opposite, being both limited and flawed. We are not the measure of all truth. We must be willing to say assent to what God says is true just because He says it is true. It will not do to reduce revelation to what our brains or imaginations can conceive of Scripture saying. That is rationalism disguised. This is why Bryan Cross has rightly described Protestantism as baptized humanism. For the Protestant, revelation can only be said to teach what he can himself believe it possible to be teaching. He thereby makes himself the measure of revelation’s content rather than being measured by it.