[Cronos]

No, the "authorities" were the hierarchy over the "Church as a whole" wherein the church in question was only that which was not already excluded.

You're now telling me that you know it better than history? Better than the fact that this was the Church, not the hierarchy? If you wish to disagree, fine, but don't tell me that history was wrong and offer no proofs to the contrary.

[roamer_1]

[roamer_1:] No, the "authorities" were the hierarchy over the "Church as a whole" wherein the church in question was only that which was not already excluded.

You're now telling me that you know it better than history? Better than the fact that this was the Church, not the hierarchy? If you wish to disagree, fine, but don't tell me that history was wrong and offer no proofs to the contrary.

I believe that you and I are talking past each other.

I will cede the point that the books that form the New Covenant canon grew together organically - That traditional attributions and outright popularity determined the canon long before it was made canon.

I will even cede that the council(s) gave great deference to what I would call the "organic canon," for the purposes of distinction...

I was speaking of the actual declaration of the canon (Trent). There were no ballots passed down to the lowest members. It was not by referendum. It was an high council - that's all.