[Mrs. Don-o]

Of course the list of sacred texts suitable to use liturgically (that is, per definition, the canon) was clear way before Trent.

I suggest you look into the era of Pope Damasus and the synods of Rome, Hippo, and Carthage, 1500 years before Reformation-era dissenters made all Christian creeds and canons controverial again.

Please look at the "Decretal of Gelasius", attributed to a synod convoked by Pope Damasus in the year 382 AD.. The other one you want to look at is the Canon of Innocent I, sent in 405 AD to a Gallican bishop in answer to his inquiry about the canon.

Both contain all the deuterocanonicals, without any distinction, and are identical with the catalogue of Trent.

You can see for yourself that the books identified as Scripture exhibited very substantial continuity: Trent merely recognized and certified more than a millennium worth of Christian liturgical practice.

[ealgeone]

Of course the list of sacred texts suitable to use liturgically (that is, per definition, the canon) was clear way before Trent.

I suggest you read some history on the formation of the canon. It's not as clear as you suggest.

Both contain all the deuterocanonicals, without any distinction, and are identical with the catalogue of Trent.

Yet not recognized dogmatically by Rome until Trent.

However they were not recognized by the early ekklesia.

[Elsie]

Of course the list of sacred texts suitable to use liturgically (that is, per definition, the canon) was clear way before Trent.

Glad to see you admit TRENT was a waste of time.

[daniel1212]

Indeed, do a little research on Decretum Gelasianum or the Gelasian Decree, the canon of which is though by most scholars as probably originating in the 6th century, though likely representing a tradition that can be traced back to Pope Damasus I

"The work reached its final form in a five-chapter text written by an anonymous scholar between 519 and 553, the second chapter of which is a list of books of Scripture presented as having been made Canonical by a Council of Rome under Pope Damasus I, bishop of Rome 366–383."

See also Decretum Gelasianum

Both contain all the deuterocanonicals, without any distinction, and are identical with the catalogue of Trent. You can see for yourself that the books identified as Scripture exhibited very substantial continuity: Trent merely recognized and certified more than a millennium worth of Christian liturgical practice.

Rather, the canon saw disagreement among scholars - a minority but substantial - down through centuries and right in the council , and parroting RCs presenting the canon as having been settled from the 4th c. onward (which makes Luther some sort of maverick rebel), and that Trent merely affirmed it is part of the RC propaganda that has been refuted so many times before. Thus your reply does not refute the premise that "Roman Catholicism didn't finalize their canon until Trent," as finalize meaning to make the majority position now indisputable, as an article of faith with its anathemas, though that was after an informal vote of 24 yea, 15 nay, with 16 abstaining (44%, 27%, 29%)