And yet even without one conviened the Orthodox Church has survived 4 times as long since the last Ecomunical Council then the Anglicans as a whole. Conservatism vs the spirit of the day has prevailed and will continue to do just that until the Second Coming.
jb6 picked up on something that I chose not to address with my initial post. It is not really true that the Orthodox Church hasn't convened ecumenical councils -- they just haven't called them that, presumably out of the same motivation that the Orthodox Church has never made a bishop of Rome and called him the Patriarch of Rome.
Fr. John Romanides makes a strong case for other councils that meet criteria for being Ecumenical in the Orthodox Church. Whatever one calls them, they are quite reliable expressions of the mind of the Church.
The Anglican author in question seems to be quite influenced by Vatican II. It is rarely talked about that Vatican II was an unusual council in that it really had no pressing dogmatic issues, but seems to have purely pastoral in nature.
From an Orthodox perspective, my question to those who would criticize the Orthodox for not convening ecumenical councils -- what heresy or heresies should these councils have been called to address? Calling an ecumenical council just to prove that one can do it is a bit like having a Pope make an infallible declaration ex cathedra on something that all Catholics believe anyway -- just to demonstrate that he can do it...