He doesn't have to be Catholic to believe history as told by the Catholic. If most of what history we know was written by Catholic, or through Catholic influences, he may not know the difference.

So, again, you think it's more likely that a man who's professionally a scholar is actually duped by some grand Catholic conspiracy than you, a man with no training and who listens willingly to anti-Catholics without checking their statements ,were simply wrong? That's compelling to you is it? That's what you've convinced yourself of? Remind yourself that Marsden is not alone - this is the standard position, so the Church has basically hoodwinked everyone who works on medieval history? That's more likely than that you were just wrong because you've actually done no real research?