You wrote:
“I already did that. Brought it, named the exact post, etc.”
Good.
“First things first;
If there is some OTHer than what was presented in post # 38, on this thread, what was it, and where?”
The quote that was first listed doe snot appear in Trent. Even the correct quote wasn’t issued by the Council Fathers in toto, but a committee by the way. That sort of context is important. Protestant anti-Catholics avoid all of that context. Also, the literal context - the sentences preceeding it - were excised. Why?
Not "appear in Trent?" Let us check look again at the title heading;
TEN RULES CONCERNING PROHIBITED BOOKS DRAWN UP BY THE FATHERS CHOSEN BY THE COUNCIL OF TRENT AND APPROVED BY POPE PIUS
Drawn up by "Fathers" chosen by the Council...approved by the Pope!
Does not appear in Trent? It is a direct derivative.
Yes. Regarding this issue, the Ten Rules are as a distilled wine, as a brandy-wine, is to a grape.
The "grape" in this instance was the larger proceedings of the Councils of Trent (over a span of years, including all the other) with the "brandy"* being a distilled product.
Here is another look at the cluster or grouping of decree The Catholic University in America; Council of Trent
Notes associated with the Ten Rules indicate coming from the XXV and final session.
All of which means, you were wrong. Please issue retraction of your comments asserting it was "not from Trent", along with retraction of all insult connected with your statements, to the offended parties. It was the insults so casually flung about, which bring my insistence, by the way...
otherwise, such a small error, even one so stubbornly clung to in face of all evidence to the contrary, would be but a small matter.