It's a shame the EO can't step back and see how this "consensus patrum" can lead to heresy. As a Born Again Christian I don't give any special weight to the various gatherings of theologians and their pronouncements. The answers are in Scripture. If something is not clear in Scripture it's better to just leave it alone rather than to rely on politically connected theologians that did a good job submitting to the prevailing power.
A great example of how badly things go awry when depending on your "consensus partum" is the Marian Cult and worship of Mary that is so prevalent in the RCC.
Agreed.
Does that include the gatherings of theologians that canonized the scripture in the 4th century? Seems you give an awful lot of weight to them.
And your example of this is that the Latins have developed a Marian Cult and worship Mary? Assuming for the moment that the Latins, or some of them, have developed an unfortunate, maybe even heretical Marian Cult (I happen think some have, but I know they don't worship Panagia), I can assure you that it could only be through a distortion of the consensus patrum. That happens in the West. In fact, one of the basic tenets of Protestantism which you carried with you from the Latin Church, Original Sin, is the result of a misunderstanding of the consensus patrum. It is argued that both the dogmas of the Immaculate Conception and Papal Infallibility are found in the consensus patrum. We disagree. Anyway, what particular heresies do you see Orthodoxy to have fallen into on account of the consensus patrum?
I sense that you may misunderstand what the consensus patrum is since you write of "...various gatherings of theologians and their pronouncements." Do you mean Ecumenical councils, like the one that determined the Creed or that Christ is True God and True Man? The pronouncements of the Councils are part of Holy Tradition, like Scripture and the consensus patrum...and other things.