There is an English chapel being restored, and a mural was discovered underneath the whitewash, determined to be from the puritan era. Unsurprisingly. It raises a question in the restoration. Do they seek to go back and restore or at least display the mural? The whitewashing is also a legitimate part of the chapel's history after all, and in this case, I was told, an important part. Do we insist on restoring to the earliest possible date? Wouldn't that be privileging time-depth over other considerations, perhaps even making a god of it? Do we restore to the best art? Another god, then. Do we restore a building to its maximum size, or when it was most important, or to the era when the things now most important to us happened? What if there are few other examples of a particular era remaining, so we want to use this one for that purpose, or similarly, an important piece of women's history, international history, ethnic history? We find whitewash and reflexively want to take it off and return the building to its "original" state. Yet we have smuggled in other values without noticing. Secular historians might be making a god of the art and the Christians buying in unquestioningly- exactly what the puritans warned about. Always restoring to the oldest makes a god of tradition.
A related topic is in the pipeline.