John Damascene cites as scripture Wisdom 3:1 (St. John of Damascus, An Exposition of the Orthodox Faith, Book IV, Chapter XV). And Baruch 3:37, and Tobit 3:4 (even though he COULD have merely cited John 1:14 to make the same point). Again, he cites Barcuh 3:37 in Book IV, Chapter XVII. Baruch 3:38 in Book IV, Chapter VIII. And 2 Macc 9:5 in his summation.
As for Cardinal Cajetan, you should read what your source (the Catholic Encyclopedia) relates Popes saying about King Henry VIII... before he went apostate. (ironically, Cajetan drafted the condemnation of Henry VIII.) Cajetan Resolutely smashed Luther over many issues, but on the one issue of the canon, he was convinced by Luther. I can’t understand how any reasonable person could find the sentence “was convinced by the assertions of Luther” stupid. Cajetan cited Luther’s arguments in regard to Jerome verbatim, explicitly recognizing he was taking a position midway between Luther’s and certain of Luther’s opponents. His position was then found heretical and anathematized by the Council of Trent.
Notice how your post is essentially just a repetition of what you said before, with the same problems you had with the previous one, without replying to anything I actually said, or providing any real support for the silly things you want us to believe.
I’m going to have to stick with Cajetan, Latin prefaces of the scripture, the consensus of the Fathers and their view of the apocrypha, over some random guy on CF who thinks he can fool people into believing something contrary to history.