Since all were declared anathema (bound for hell) in 1546 unless they accept the apocrypha as part of the canon of Scripture, you have your answer. :-)
Since the traditions of the Roman Catholic Church stand or fall by the apocrypha writings alone, one can easily see they either had to do that or go down the tubes.
"But the early Catholic Church leaders who were familiar with the Hebrew texts clearly distinguish Canonical and Apocrypha writings. The writings of Cyril of Jerusalem, St. Jerome, and Bishop Melito of Sardis (170 A.D.) indicate a recognition of the difference between inspired Holy text and the Apocrypha.
Church leaders such as Origen, Tertullian, and Hilary of Poitiersand - Hilary of Poitiers, exclude the Apocrypha from Sacred canon by their count of books.
As stated, the Apocrypha was never even declared authoritative scripture by the Catholic Church itself until the council of Trent some fifteen hundred years after Christ established the Church.
And despite some RCC objections, and claims that these were always part of canon, the facts speak for themselves.
This is even clearly admitted in the New Catholic Encyclopedia which states:
St. Jerome distinguished between canonical books and ecclesiastical books. The latter he judged were circulated by the Church as good spiritual reading but were not recognized as authoritative Scripture. The situation remained unclear in the ensuing centuries...For example, John of Damascus, Gregory the Great, Walafrid, Nicolas of Lyra and Tostado continued to doubt the canonicity of the deuterocanonical books. According to Catholic doctrine, the proximate criterion of the biblical canon is the infallible decision of the Church.
This decision was not given until rather late in the history of the Church at the Council of Trent. The Council of Trent definitively settled the matter of the Old Testament Canon. That this had not been done previously is apparent from the uncertainty that persisted up to the time of Trent" (The New Catholic Encyclopedia, The Canon).- T.Warren
This is even clearly admitted in the New Catholic Encyclopedia which states:
St. Jerome distinguished between canonical books and ecclesiastical books. The latter he judged were circulated by the Church as good spiritual reading but were not recognized as authoritative Scripture. The situation remained unclear in the ensuing centuries...For example, John of Damascus, Gregory the Great, Walafrid, Nicolas of Lyra and Tostado continued to doubt the canonicity of the deuterocanonical books. According to Catholic doctrine, the proximate criterion of the biblical canon is the infallible decision of the Church.
This decision was not given until rather late in the history of the Church at the Council of Trent. The Council of Trent definitively settled the matter of the Old Testament Canon. That this had not been done previously is apparent from the uncertainty that persisted up to the time of Trent" (The New Catholic Encyclopedia, The Canon).- T.Warren
You weave a web of deceit -do you do so intentionally? LOL
Trent was not an infallible council, it was providential, The early Church clearly affirmed the deuterocanonicals, and when the Church issued Jerome to create the Vulgate translation, it clearly held to the canon as it is today. It is true that an infallible declaration did not come until Trent; however, an infallible pronouncement does not declare something new. The canon was under controversy during the period -as such, Trent settled all disputes.
LOL!!!
What of Tradition not contained in Sacred Scripture (including your apocrypha writings)?
???
Saint Jerome never stated deuterocanonicals were uninspired. He simply argued they not be in the canon -there is a big difference. I suggest if you spend some time researching the issue you will find several quotations of Saint Jerome referring to the deuterocanonicals as "Scripture" -in fact, Saint Jerome often quotes the deuterocanonicals in his writings.
Although Saint Jerome believed the deuterocanonicals were inspired he argued, rather, that they should not be in the canon, which in his day, different Churches held to different canons, for a canon was what was used in the liturgy. Before the uniform liturgy was promulgated throughout the Universal Church each Church had its own liturgy, which means it would select which Sacred Scriptures to be read during Mass; as such, there was no universal lectionary like there exists since Trent and exists today.
Saint Jerome believed that some of the deuterocanonicals were harder to understand, and as such he did not find them appropriate for the liturgy and as already stated, he never argued against their inspiration. Regardless, Saint Jerome humbly and obediently submitted to the authentic authority of the Church AND included the deuterocanonicals in his Vulgate translation -hardly something one that thought something uninspired would do!