***If what you are saying is true it leaves the church of Rome on the outside looking in. You never had an ecumenical council that was binding on all member churches that declared the canon.***
Really?
So the Council of Hippo, followed by Carthage, Trent and a second Carthage (over which Augustine presided) weren’t binding?
***During the Apostolic Era in which these people lived they called themselves Christians***
The term Catholic first is documented about 100 AD. The early Christians called themselves a lot of things. They most certainly didn’t call themselves Baptists or Presbyterians or Anglicans or...
Technically no. You folks seem to make a technicality out of everything so I would assume you would appreciate the irony of it. As it has been stated numerous times there have only been seven ecumenical councils involving all of the Roman and Eastern Orthodox churches. None of these dealt with the canon of Scripture. I believe in large part because it was largely understood what it was.
For example Jerome had started his translation prior to the Synod of Hippo. If it was not well established how would he have known which books to translate?
The western church headquartered in Rome seems to make a habit of overstating it's role in things. I'm sure it has been successful in it's claims in the past because it had a near monopoly on speech and the power of the state to back it. All these claims have been revealed for what they are with the freedom to read Scripture individually and to discuss openly thoughts about what they reveal and what the historical record shows.
“So the Council of Hippo, followed by Carthage, Trent and a second Carthage (over which Augustine presided) weren’t binding?”
No, in fact they weren’t binding, except locally, MBS.
“The term Catholic first is documented about 100 AD. The early Christians called themselves a lot of things. They most certainly didn’t call themselves Baptists or Presbyterians or Anglicans or...”
The term was first used by +Ignatius of Antioch. Its alternately amusing and irritating the way the Roman Church has used this historical fact. When +Ignatius used the term, he meant that the Church was the universal church. His use of the term had nothing to do with the Church of Rome any more than with the Churchs of Alexandria, Jerusalem or Antioch. Its amusing because it bespeaks a funny lack of understanding of basic Greek and irritating in that it demonstrates a presumption which The Church in the East has decried for nearly 1000 years now. From a purely neutral standpoint, it speaks volumes about the inflated view Rome has had of itself ever since the seat of the Empire moved east.
BTW, Antioch is where people first started calling themselves Christians, but not Catholics.