To say that a teaching has the unanimous consent of the Fathers is to say that one or the other of the following is true:
1.It is explicitly affirmed by all the Fathers.
2. It is explcitly affirmed by some of the Fathers and explicitly denied by none of them
This is a good starter definition, and it is hardly "Catholic" in a pejorative sense. It merely accomodates the obvious truth that no one Father's opinion trumps all others.
There is another problem with the quotes from Augustine that you give, that I should have pointed out earlier. Whenever the Fathers oppose the teaching of Scripture to something "from without", they are not opposing the teaching of Scripture to a teaching found in the traditions of the Church. For the dichotomy between Scripture and Church Tradition is not a dichotomy until after the Reformation. So, when they say things like "scripture alone...", the question to ask is "Scripture alone as opposed to what ?" Scripture is not being opposed to the traditions of the apostolic Churches, but to the texts of pagans, the teachings of pagans, etc. So, when Augustine says "Whatever you hear from them [the Scriptures], let that be well received by you. Whatever is without them refuse, lest you wander in a cloud" that which is from without, to which he is opposing the message of Scripture, is not the traditions of the Church (in which he himself is a Bishop, and from which he received both the Scripture and his interpretation of Scripture). Rather, he is opposing the teachings of Scripture to the teachings of Manichees, Roman astrology, donatist theories, etc. That you read these passages from Augustine to affirm an opposition between Scripture and tradition shows more that you are importing post-Reformation categories into Augustine than that Augustine affirmed a post-reformation thesis.
If all you want is for me to rely on Scripture, then you should know that I already do and that you did not need to quote from Augustine to convince me to do so. What I will not do is pretend that the texts are intelligible in themselves, or even have a determinate meaning, when read wihtout having first affirmed the teachings of the apostolic churches.
Council of Trent
Session IV, April 8, 1546, Decree Concerning the Edition and the Use of the Sacred Books:
... "Furthermore, in order to restrain petulant spirits, it [the Council of Trent] decrees that no one, relying on his own skill, shall,—in matters of faith, and of morals pertaining to the edification of Christian doctrine,—wresting the sacred Scriptures to his own senses, presume to interpret the said sacred Scripture contrary to that sense which holy Mother Church—to whom it belongs to judge of the true sense and interpretation of the Holy Scriptures—hath held and doth hold; or even contrary to the unanimous consent of the Fathers; even though such interpretations were never (intended) to be at any time published. Contraveners shall be made known by their Ordinaries and be punished with the penalties by law established."
Source: Dogmatic Canons and Decrees, copyright 1912 by the Devin-Adair Company, published by TAN Books and Publishers, Inc., 1977, pg. 11.
In the absence of a word by word interpretation of Scripture approved by the unanimous consent of the fathers, it would appear you could be in deep doo doo.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------