“Again, we must rely on extant evidence. The extant evidence demostrates that these books were in fact included.”
Included, yes, considered equal to scripture, no. That has already been well established, not just by Jerome and Cajetan, and by Athanasius and “Pope” Gregory the 1st, but by the content of the apocrypha themselves which teach witchcraft and contradict the scripture and history.
“And the Church far weightier still.”
You mean the Church that used to declare that the Bishops of Antioch, Alexandria and Rome each possessed the Throne of Peter? And the same Church as led by Bishops like Polycarp, Ignatius and Clement who never once referenced any Papal authority, and when referencing Peter only listed him among the other Apostles?
If it’s THAT church, I’d be more inclined to agree with you. The Roman church, on the other hand, definitely not. In fact, if the Roman church knew their history better, they would not have forgotten Jerome’s judgment of the Apocrypha.
“Included, yes, considered equal to scripture, no.”
That’s not what the manuscript evidence in Codex Vaticanus and Sinaiticus says. The books were included.
“You mean the Church that used to declare that the Bishops of Antioch, Alexandria and Rome each possessed the Throne of Peter?”
To which of these three do you submit?