It is a good question, and a logical one given the discussion on textual criticism. It can be quite difficult to understand a given perspective without this information. I chose infallible but not inerrant. Perhaps this would better explain my reliance on Tradition and the Fathers for interpretation rather than the text itself. Belief in the inerrancy of the Bible, I believe, has driven much of Fundamentalist Christianity into error. Since there are seeming contradictions in the text of the Bible, and since there are differences in the texts used even by the Fathers, holders of inerrancy are forced to either make stuff up to force the texts to fit, or simply ignore parts of the Scriptures that do not fit with their preconceived idea of what they think the Scriptures SHOULD have said.
In addition, I believe that inerrancy would be nearly impossible. Even if we could agree that a certain manuscript was, indeed, the one written by Paul or Mark's own hand, we would still be faced with the difficulties of translation as well as being 2000 years removed from the time and culture of the writers. It would be nearly impossible to simply pick up the text and accurately know what was meant without knowing the person who wrote it and the mindset of that individual at the time he wrote the words. In other words, even if the author penned the document both inerrantly and infallibly, what are the chances of our interpretations being both inerrant and infallible 2000 years later? That is why the Traditions passed down by the Church regarding these matters are so important. The bottom line is this: The Orthodox Church gave the world the Bible. She should know what it says and means. I will grant that my view on textual criticism is somewhat harsh, and admit up front that it may not apply to everyone, but I have always seen textual criticism as an attempt by the Faithless to justify their own unbelief by calling into question the Scriptures. If there is no absolute Truth, then one can believe whatever they want. This is pretty much the mantra of modern liberalism and the ecumenism that it spawned.