It is possible to pick and choose points they made, but tracing ideas to the early church fathers is not the same as tracing them to the apostles.
Some may act otherwise, but the catechism and doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church are not infallible. The Roman Catholic Church may contain errors and falsehoods.
According to the Roman Catholic Church, there are only a few select statements that are infallible. I think either a council or a Pope can make an infallible statement, but each has special rules.
The Scriptures are without error or contradiction. They are of a different order. Most Scripture is easy to understand. For difficult Scriptures, a main point can often be gleamed while accepting an imperfect understanding. However, we should be able to flip our focus and say "I may not understand what it does mean, but I do understand what it doesn't mean."
I think we can agree on 4 givens: Perfect God, Perfect Scripture, imperfect man and imperfect interpretation.
How can the idea of perfect interpretation be based on the imperfect interpretations of imperfect writings of imperfect men with imperfect knowledge? Seriously.
The early church fathers understood the universal church as those who are saved. The universal faith as that which saves and will not be burned away on judgment day. The use of the word Catholic by the early church fathers did not point to the earthly, temporal structure of the Roman Catholic Church, but to perfection and eternity.
In 180 AD, Irenaeus wrote in "Against Heresies", that "the Catholic Church possesses one and the same faith throughout the whole world." The correct interpretation is that there exists one faith that leads to salvation. Those who share the true faith are part of the Universal Church.
To use Irenaeus' statement to support an earthly, temporal authority is a clear example of imperfect interpretation.
Selah! Here is wisdom.