I don't think too many are concerned with the 'Patristic' scholars...
It is known by most modern scholars who have compared the written ideas of the Patristic scholars along with the available evidence and concluded the Ignatian letters to be fakes...
You have a couple of sets of letters supposedly written by Ignatius which when compared are the same letters...One set of letters contains nothing Catholic...The other set of the same letters is weighted down with Catholic terms and phrases...
If Ignatius wrote both sets of letters, which do you suppose he wrote first??? The Catholic set and then when he rewrote the letters, he left everything Catholic out of the letters???
Or do you think Ignatius may have written the non Catholic letters initially and later someone came by and rewrote the letters and added everything Catholic???
And then we have the Isadorian Decretals, more fake documents your religion is based on...And the Donation of Constantine...More fake Catholic history...And the list goes on and on...
They were always received [the 7 that Eusebius cited] as authentic by the Catholic and Orthodox Church and only in the Post Reformation period did “Protestants question them”.
That's because the means to research these forgeries became more available and it was people who started 'inside' your religion who became Protestants had access to this material...
Iscool:
I agree, most fundamentalist protestants in the United States are not too concerned with either the Church Fathers are legitimate Patristic Scholars.