However, Scripture was written by these same "fallible men" and yet we say "Scripture is infallible". When Paul, John, Matthew, Peter et al., were writing the works which came to be included in the New Testament, their "fallibility" must have put on hold so to speak, as the Holy Spirit inspired them, right?
We could also say the same thing about the process by which the Canon of Scripture came to be assembled in the early Church, couldn't we? It was all accomplished by "fallible men". Yet we say it's "infallible"
So could we not say that in regard to Scripture, God's providence has allowed fallible men to provide us with an infallible work.
My question therefore is this; why should that gift of "infallibility" extend only to the writing and assembly of Scripture and not to its interpretation and transmission?
The early church fathers viewed the scriptures as being divinely influenced. So much so they sorted the inspired word of God from those writings they deemed was not inspired, giving us the Bible. They knew what was true and what wasn't. The construction of the Bible was simply to do it now before time corrupted the work of God. Not surprisingly, the fathers never included their own works as inspired by God.
It is interesting that if anything in Church history should be considered infallible it would be the creeds of the Church. They draw on scripture but often do not contain scripture, to explain doctrinal positions of the Church. Therefore, if anything would be considered infallible in Church writings, I would think it would be the creeds.
However, some of the very earliest creeds, which were approved by the Church and handed down, seems to have holes in them. For example, the Nicene Creed is often argued between the Catholics and Orthodox about whether the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son or from the Father and Son. Catholics would have to say that the Nicene Creed is infallible but where does that leave the Orthodox? Is the Church about to say the Orthodox's interpretation is wrong? Are they willing to scrap the Nicene Creed?
If infallibility extends to interpretation in the early church, there is no evidence of it. In fact, quite the contrary. From the writings of the early fathers, in most cases they seem to draw their arguments directly from scripture. Everything else, was always viewed as suspect.