I understand from discussions on these threads how much value RC's place in the writings of their "church fathers", but your probably the first that has intimated that they might not be totally infallible. When looking at "church fathers" you have to bear in mind that the writings are being done by individuals with and agenda. Also, you have to remember that those whose writings were found to be at variance with the goals of the dominant church of the time were systematically destroyed.
For example we know very little about the Christian Churches that existed outside of the Eastern Church, or Western Church control because once they became large they were systematically destroyed and all their writings as well.
Intimate nuthin! I’ll say it flat out: the Church Fathers can be wrong and sometimes are. They do not have the same weight Scripture has. Period.
However, that’s a long way from saying they have no weight whatsoever. Probably the best way to treat them is as follows—if all of the Fathers say X, then you’re on real shaky ground saying Y. If some Fathers say X and some say Y, you might be okay saying either as well. In most cases when Catholics argue about what the Church Fathers say, it is because all of them say X, so it’s real clear what the Church believed.
On the “destroyed documents” hypothesis, I have heard that argument but I think it’s extremely weak. Even things are are lost leave some kind of trace (like Origen quoted Celsus’ book almost in its entirety—if only to refute it).
Also, many of the earliest documents have only come to light in the last century or two. But when they were found, they didn’t really overturn what the Church was saying all along.
We actually know quite a bit about the Ethiopian, Coptic, and Syriac Churches, which have a manuscript tradition of their own, and in many cases preserved documents that were lost in Greece and in the West. Pooling together all these sources, do we find anything that really shakes up our vision of what you are calling “the dominant church”? Not really.