Bludgeon wrote:A. "Hidden History" = "Not History". Hence the tabloid comparison.
I'm not quite sure what you are getting at here. First off, the tabloid comparison was silly. What a theologian writes and what a tabloid writes are two different things.
Are you trying to say that history cannot be re-written? We are constantly discovering new things that tell us a different story about history. Archaeologist, scientist, historians, and many others are able to find new clues that give us a better understanding of the past. History itself is absolute. What happened in the past does not change. What changes is our interpretation.
With regard to Catholicism and tradition/rituals, those change as well. The pope sets the agenda and that is based off of his interpretation of the bible. People interpret the bible differently because it is more of a philosophical document than a historical one. It is the only piece of evidence that a person named Jesus even existed. There are also many who believe more books of the bible exist. I find the bible an interesting religious document because it wasn't even written by Jesus himself. Christianity is based solely on others interpretations of an individuals teachings. Now that is ridiculous.
Lastly, a secret is a "hidden history." Does that mean it never happened?