The below is from pp 42-44 in Thomas Joseph White’s 2024 book, The Principles of Catholic Theology Book 2: On the Rational Credibility of Christianity (in Chapter 1 Why Not Be an Atheist? The Enigma of Human Existence and the Question of Reasonable Religious Belief)

Of course, other traditions are purely monotheistic. One may naturally think of Judaism and Christianity, as well as their famous rival Islam. But there are less widespread monotheistic tradions, which are also quite significant, such as Hindu Vaishnavism, Sikhism, and Persian Zoroastrianism. These traditions and their diversity raise several significant questions. Should any one religious tradition really be allowed to tell us something final and conclusive about God, or should we rely uniquely or primarily upon philosophy in order to think about such questions? Perhaps philosophical reason can be used to protect us from the “myths of the poets” and the religious delusions of men, even while steering us toward God. This was the claim of several prominent modern Enlightenment philosophers (Locke and Kant).

At the same time, we should ask whether philosophy alone suffices to give us conclusive knowledge of who God is and, if not, whether we should trust appeals to revelation? If we do open ourselves up rationally to the possibility of divine revelation, under what circumstances or conditions should we do so? Likewise, if we do appeal to divine revelation to think about God, must we then abandon the philosoiphical attempt to attain knowledge of God? De we have to choose between divine revelation and human philosophy? And should we be forced into a situation where we are obliged to choose “the one true religion” against all other forms of religiosity distinct from it? Can one believe in an absolute revelation and still learn from other religious traditions? In other words, how should we navigate claims of the different religious traditions, their truth foundations and absence thereof, and the questions of their compatibility with one another and with philosophical reason?

These topics can seem vast and even overwhelming or at least seriously challenging. Presumably, if there is a true “revealed religion,” the we need that religious tradition itself to help us resolve these thorny issues. If we were to find such intellectual competence in Christianity, for example, that would be precisely one sign of its unique truthfulness, and it could in turn help us come to term with these legitimate questions. Furthermore, on this view, shouldn’t the revealed religion in question also provide us with a living tradition of philosophical resources by which we can think through these complicated issues? For if a “revealed religion” presents us with a theological form of thinking about God we are meant to take seriously, it must also make competent use of natural human reason in the service of and in harmon with its religious teachings. This is an issue we will return to below.

[That last paragraph really grabbed my attention and prompted my posting this excerpt since I appreciate both Byzantine liturgy and Thomist philosophy.]