Bronx2, to be blunt, you cannot have this certitude in Rome if something is still a matter of debate, which the canon was, without those that did dissent being disallowed at Trent or disciplined at all. This was because it yet lacked infallible definition, as substantiated, and which is what disallows any dissent, and your attempt to defend yourself is simply another attempt at sophisticated sophistry in lieu of a real argument, which in quality and quantity was presented to you.
If you disagree that Trent provided the first infallible definition and which precludes further dissent, then you can argue with those of your own who state this.
Having certitude does not preclude debate. Certitude ,or as your previous post mentioned reasonable certitude, or even absolute certitude all have different meanings . Thus to make a statement regarding certitude one must first provide a precise definition of said term. You did not define a precise definition at the outset.
Since the Canon remained the same from Cathage/Hippo until today, save for Luther,how valid and forceful was this debate.
Trent merely rubber stamped what had been done 1100 years before.
Believe what you want, end of discussion . God bless and Good night.
WELL PUT.
Thx.