Let me suggest, Happy Lutheran, that you look closely at Luther's quote ("Bondage of the Will," though I do not believe it to be correct, is a masterful work, by the way). Look at the assumptions he makes.
For devotedly striving to dissent from the Pelagians, they begin to deny the “merit of worthiness”, whereas by the very way in which they deny it, they establish it more firmly than ever. They deny it by their word and pen, but establish it in reality, and in heart-sentiment: and then, they are worse than the Pelagians themselves: and that, on two accounts. First, the Pelagians plainly, candidly, and ingeniously, assert the “merit of worthiness”, thus calling a boat a boat and a fig a fig; and teaching what they really think. Whereas, our “free will” friends, while they think and teach the same thing, yet mock us with lying words and false appearances, as though they dissented from the Pelagians; when in fact it is quite the contrary. So that, with respect to their hypocrisy, they seem to be the Pelagians strongest opposers, but with respect to the reality of the matter, and their heart-tenant, they are twice dipped Pelagians. And next, under this hypocrisy, they estimate and purchase the grace of God at a much lower rate than the Pelagians themselves. For the Pelagians assert, that it is not a certain little something in us by which we deserve grace, but whole, perfect, great, and many, devoted efforts and works. Whereas, our friends declare, that it is certain little something, almost nothing, by which we deserve grace.
Luther assumes through this whole quote that justification is something that can be "purchased," "merited," "estimated," "deserved," etc. And yet what we teach is NOT that grace may be "purchased" or "merited" at all, nor that it is "deserved" by anyone. At least not in the sense you are taking these things. What we believe is that grace is ALL gift. Over and against this accusation of Luther, which is aimed at Erasmus' weak-hearted tome, we believe that we are saved purely by the grace of God, and not by our meriting OR Christ's meriting our salvation.
The entire tone assumes the juridical view of salvation. It assumes that sin is a guilt we inherited, that damnation is a punishment for that sin, that God gives grace because someone paid the price for that sin in our place and satisfied His justice, etc. If you are going to cram salvation into these categories, this is the dispute you will have. But we do not. For us, sin is a condition we inherited, damnation is the result of that condition, God gives grace because He loves us and wants us to be saved, etc. For us, merits don't really enter the picture. As has already been stated, there is a sense of that in Orthodox soteriology, such as "make us worthy to partake," etc., but even there, it isn't "declare us worthy and ignore the fact that we are unworthy," it is "MAKE us worthy, who are unworthy." For us, soteriology occurs at the level of existence, not at the level of justice. God saves us not because His Son "paid the price," but because He loves us and wants us to be healthy and whole.
This oversimplifies the case on both sides, but I do so to hopefully help you see why, for us, Luther's remarks make little sense. As applied to Erasmus, he makes a brilliant argument. As against us, he is arguing against a strawman. To be fair to him, he wasn't arguing against us. My point is simply that when you use these words and apply them to us, they don't really fit.