Tom also posted about this same topic on OC.net. I gave this reply over there, and am copying/pasting it here for Cafe members to read/critique.
[link]
================================
The key difference between St.Paul and the writings of individual Fathers and Saints, is (as others have pointed out) that his are considered "inspired Scripture" - thus their primary author is God, so content wise we cannot admit there being any error, let alone errors touching on key aspects of theology or morality!
This distinction however (between the Scriptures and other writings) needs to be explained. This distinction does not mean that the Fathers were not inspired. Rather this is a question of degree more than it is a question of kind. Wherever we find small "lapses" or imprecision in the thoughts/words of individual Church Fathers, what we are witnessing are areas of their intellect that were obviously not completely healed at the time they wrote.
Now is this to claim that prior to his martyrdom, St.Paul was necessarily 100% "healed" so to speak? Well, tuthfully this is neither here nor there. For we are not talking simply about writings simply written by him, but writings by him which came (from a very early time) to be recognized as speaking authoratatively the mind of the Church - for they are foundational texts, resting at the heart of the Holy Tradition. The Body of Christ (the Orthodox Church) recognizes their catholicity and authority in this respect. To say they contain "errors", let alone of the kind you cite, would be akin to saying there are "errors" in the Creed, whose formation is (also) the result of the Church's universal witness.
We know from the Epistles of St.Paul themselves, that St.Paul did author other documents, which by God's permission are no longer extant. Perhaps it was because these were not so useful, or may have suffered from the type of imprecessions/problems that TomS (falsely) believes can be found in the canonical Epistles of the New Testament.
Unlike the RC's, Orthodoxy does not teach that inspiration ended with the death of St.John the Theologian/Apostle. However, there are very few things we can point to (perhaps the Creed, and things like this) in our Tradition, with a claim on "inspiration" akin to the Holy Scriptures (and certainly not with the same centrality). Since they are the heart, and are accepted in total, the Church doesn't admit the possibility they are at all contaminated. If they were, then we'd have to believe the dogmatic roots of the Church are bad (and what would that say for the rest of the Tree?)
Seraphim