The same clergy that was guided to put together the canon, also included the deuterocanonicals. Obviously they felt that they had value.
Like I have said, Protestants pick and choose what THEY consider to be canonical. They could care less what the venerable Church Fathers took into consideration. Even the 1611 KJV had them included!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deuterocanonical_books
...The large majority of Old Testament references in the New Testament are taken from the Greek Septuagint (LXX)which includes the deuterocanonical books, as well as apocrypha both of which are called collectively anagignoskomena (things that are read)...
The Jewish community and the Hebrew Christians of the New Testament did not use or include the Apocrypha. Jesus nor the Apostles ever quoted the Apocrypha as divine authority. The Hebrew Bible doesnt include them. Did early Jewish believers use anything other then the writings of the Apostles and the Old Testament? No.
The historian Josephus, who was Jewish, excludes the Apocrypha. The Jews had only twenty-two books that deserved belief, but those which were written after the time of Artaxerxes (the Apocrypha) were not of equal credit with the rest, in which period they had no prophets at all (Lib. 1, Con. Apion.).
The books in the Apocrypha even include things that have been proven historically inaccurate.
If I remember correctly the Apocrypha was not included until after Trent even in the RCC. It was at Trent that they wanted something to refute the reformation arguments so officially included them to bolster their doctrinal teachings so saying they arent used for doctrine is weak at best.
I would suggest that it was not the same clergy who decided to include them.
Like I have said, Protestants pick and choose what THEY consider to be canonical. They could care less what the venerable Church Fathers took into consideration. Even the 1611 KJV had them included!
Very good. The whole result of the Reformation is the ability to create one's own theology each morning over cornflakes.