Oh? Well, according to part of that Britannica article: "Two of the Old Testament Hagiographa (Ketuvim; see above The Hebrew canon)—Daniel and Esther—contain, in their Greek translations, numerous additions." As I understand it, these were the portions removed by the Protestants.
Ignoring previous posts, you suffer from a common Protestant delusion about the nature of ecumenical councils. That's the first INFALLIBLE statement; it's not the first statement.
Not according to a Catholic site. At http://www.justforcatholics.org/a108.htm it says:
"The practice of the Church up to the time of the Reformation was to follow the judgment of Jerome who rejected the Old Testament apocrypha on the grounds that these books were never part of the Jewish canon. These were permissible to be read in the churches for the purposes of edification but were never considered authoritative for establishing doctrine. The Protestants did nothing new when they rejected the apocrypha as authoritative Scripture. It was the Roman church that rejected this tradition and ‘canonized’ the ecclesiastical books." It also affirms what I said about Jerome. I think it is you, not I, who needs to check their data. Here is another source asserting that the dispute over the Apocrypha predates the Reformation. Cite your sources, for I see no backup for your contention.
Martin Luther preached people should subscribe to any ungodly passion that occurred to them. His serial adulteries were not moral failures...
Where do you get that Martin Luther was a serial adulterer? I have not heard it before, I have not read it anywhere before, and multiple internet searches failed to yield anything. Cite your sources.
Luther, moreover, preached justification through faith in Jesus. This is a Biblical teaching. "For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—not by works, so that no one can boast." Ephesians 2:8-9. Works are the result of faith, but do nothing to save us. Luther wrote to this affect.
"Works must be done, but it does not follow from this that works save....Works save externally, that is, they testify that we are just and that in a man there is the faith which saves him internally, as Paul says: 'With the heart man believeth unto rigteousness, ande with the mouth confession is made unto salvation'" --Martin Luther (What Luther Says, v.3, p.1509)
"This text, then, applies to our doctrine of justification, according to which a man must be rigteous before all works and is accepted by God without all works, through that grace alone which his faith believes and aprehends the mercy of God which is set forth in Christ. In this confidence in the mercy of God the true church goes about, with a humble confession of her sins and unworthiness, confidently expecting God to forgive her through Christ." Martin Luther (What Luther Says, vol.1, pg. 490)
The term is an invention of Luther; I use it as Luther did.
False. Sola scriptura says that the Bible alone is inerrant. You are not using it as Luther did. If you are, cite Luther.
Without such an assertion, the Pope is merely stating his opinion.
That is all he is doing. The Pope is all too human. "But you are not to be called 'Rabbi,' for you have only one Master and you are all brothers. And do not call anyone on earth 'father,' for you have one Father, and he is in heaven." Matthew 23:8-9
As for 3 Maccabees, it's authorship was believed to be post-Christian, and no pre-Christian publication of it has ever been found.
My point simply being that it was included in the Septuagint and the Catholic church excluded it. As for the other books, your source (http://biblescripture.net/Canon.html)lists them as absent.
One thing you need to understand about the reasons is that they are a conglomeration.
Also, consider the geneaologies of Jesus and the events around the crucifixion for apparent contradictions.
They are not contradictions and you know it. Here is a page listing some ways in which the Apocrypha contradicts scripture: http://www.justforcatholics.org/a109.htm As for your other "debunkings", cite some sources.
Just for Catholics is NOT a Catholic web site. It is a Protestant web site which targets Catholics for conversion/apostasy by attacking Catholic beliefs.
>> My point simply being that it was included in the Septuagint and the Catholic church excluded it. As for the other books, your source <<
And my point is that the Septuagint, as defined as the pre-Christian canon which was popularized by Hellenic Jews and became the basis for the Christian Old Testament, included 1 and 2 Maccabees, but not 3 Maccabees.