Church councils are rare and exceptional events. Given the great expense and effort in holding one, they are used only to discuss pressing matters of the faith. They are not called to settle disputes among academics. While there were voices that disputed the status of the Deuterocanonical books, these had no real impact on the beliefs and practices of the faithful. The Deuterocanonical books were included in the volumes of the Vulgate Bible and were used in the liturgies of the Church, all without distinction between them and the Protocanonical books. It was only with Martin Luther and the Protestant Reformation that the idea of rejecting these books became popular, thus the need for a dogmatic statement at Trent.
Meaning dissident voices versus the faithful I suppose, but the status of the Deuterocanonical books among faithful was that they were disputable, and Luther had that freedom.
And the extensive research testifies to the 39 book (equating to the 22/24 book canon of the Pharisees) Protestant canon as having the greatest magisterial antiquity. Which even Catholic sources affirm.
Not true. That they were even called "deuterocanonical" (second canon) implies that they were NOT recognized as Divinely-inspired Scripture as were the Protocanonical books (first canon). People knew good and well that those who were supposed as writers of the Deuteroes never claimed Divine inspiration, never saw themselves as prophets of the Lord and acknowledged that there were errors in them. Even Jerome in the fourth century stated these books were not to be used to define doctrines of the Christian faith. It his Latin translation (the Vulgate) they were placed in a separate section between the Old Testament and the New Testament books.
It was only with Martin Luther and the Protestant Reformation that the idea of rejecting these books became popular, thus the need for a dogmatic statement at Trent.
Again, simply NOT true! See reasons stated above. Luther included those books in his German translation of the Bible so anyone who tells you he threw them out is plainly ignorant or lying. Trent's "dogmatic" declaration of the RC canon declaring the Deuterocanoncials/Apocryphals as inspired writings not only proved - as Daniel1212 has shown (repeatedly) - that there was permissible disagreement on the status and authority of these books but also that they were NEEDED to try to prove a Biblical basis for the doctrine of Purgatory and Indulgences. It wasn't until John Henry Newman's explanation of the "development of doctrine" that Catholicism dropped its insistence that all her doctrines agreed with Scripture and had the unanimous consent of the fathers. Many Protestant churches continue to read and use these books in liturgy and as edification for the people. This does not mean that they recognize they have authority in matters of doctrine - just as Jerome and others acknowledged from the start. You want to read them? Fine. Just don't presume they are Holy Spirit inspired and binding upon all Christians. They aren't!
Thank you for not addressing my point that many RCs before and during Luther’s time were doing the same thing, and they’re still embraced.
Ignoring truth won’t make it go away; it just makes you look bad for ignoring it.