It understand that you feel this way. We don't see our clergy as having the authority to make statements into law. They are learners as we all are, and are free to express their opinions, of course. Then it is up to the consensus of the church as to whether or not their opinions have any value, at which point there may be discussion among us.
In the Orthodox church, every member can be a theologian and all are subject to the gift of knowledge from God. We do not have leaders who are more knowledgeable or who have greater access to God.
Ask your Bishop whether he agree he has no authority to make laws at a council or for his diocese! Where do you think the Holy Canons come from, the dogmas and creeds, the form of the liturgy?
They are learners as we all are, and are free to express their opinions, of course. Then it is up to the consensus of the church as to whether or not their opinions have any value, at which point there may be discussion among us.
Was Nicea just an opinion until accepted by all, or was it objective truth?
Again, address this belief to how Chalcedon is a dogma since the Copts and Syrians rejected it, while Robber Ephesus is false even though all the East accepted it. Except by excluding the Copts and Syrians a priori, there has yet to be any consensus on anything in the Church since AD 449! Shall we reject it all?
Or do you really mean that the only consensus that counts is the consensus we agree amongst ourselves to say it counts? That's a rather circular arguement. "We're right because we all agree we're right." And its corrolary "All of you are wrong because we all agree you all are wrong, and our consensus counts, while your opposite consensus doesn't."
Do you see the problem with what you are saying yet?