So the texts I turn to are those about the authority of the Church. But there is a funny thing. The Sola Scriptura attitude is, IMHO, anti-Incarnational. I mean there is this vague id of the Church hanging around until it has a Bible. And then it forsakes it.
But leaving the forsaking question aside, I don't think that can be right. They were depending on the Twelve, and then on those who had seen Christ, and then on those who knew those who had seen Christ. And at the same time there were writings. And, as time went by the Fathers all severally found a need to say, "This writing is good, that one, not so much, and THAT one is poison." I have images like titration or things precipitating out of solution, or even panning for gold, which is a process of using water to wash the lighter dross from the heavier (more glorious, for those with a Jones for Hebrew), more precious stuff.
That seems to me to be far more likely, an environment where Scripture is discovered hand in hand with tradition, with talking to a manifestly holy man like Polycarp, who knew John, who knew Jesus in the flesh.
That makes a lot of sense, given the rather exhaustive care lavished on the training of those who would form the initial clergy of the Church by Our Lord.