The Quarterly Journal of St. Philaret’s Institute

The article examines St. Ambrose of Milan’s views on conciliar consensus, focusing specifically on his understanding of the synchronic and diachronic Church’s unity. The synchronic aspect of conciliar consensus consists of bishops unity on specific ecclesiastical issues at a particular moment through the convocation of church councils. The diachronic aspect presupposes timeless continuity with the preceding tradition through the construction of a successive chain of councils. The author demonstrates that St. Ambrose does not conceive of church councils as separate, autonomous events in the Church’s life. St. Ambrose emphasizes the ‘horizontal’, diachronic agreement of councils, emphasizing the need to observe the continuity of later councils with earlier ones. The criterion for separating true decisions of conciliar decisions from false ones is their inclusion in tradition and, above all, their agreement with the Council of Nicaea (325). The First Ecumenical Council occupied a key position in the bishop’s ecclesiology, and its significance was not limited solely to its dogmatics but also lay in the possibility of using the council as a practical tool for achieving church unity. St. Ambrose appeals to the special status of the Council of Nicaea to present the chain of truly orthodox church councils, as well as in polemics with representatives of the Homoian movement. St. Ambrose appealed to conciliar authority in his tractate “De fide” and in the conduct of the Council of Aquileia (381). Relying on the authority of the Council of Nicaea and his own rhetorical strategies, the bishop succeeded in discrediting his Homoian opponents, thereby demonstratively separating the catholic bishops from the heretics.