By way of introduction, I'm a convert member of the OCA . I've long resisted the temptation to join, but let me say that the fraternal dialogue on this forum is a model of charity and sober moderation, and I can no longer resist putting in my two cents worth.
I think we need to clarify exactly what sense it is in which the Orthodox Church has definitively stated that Latins are in heresy. The nature of concilliar and synodal pronouncements is not to categorically say "the Latins are in heresy", but rather to anathematize certain Latin beliefs/positions as heretical. To anathematize persons who hold particular propositions is to "cast away" or "banish from the flock of the Church of God." Tough Stuff.
AFAIK, the Orthodox Church has never pronounced to the effect that Roman Catholics lack the internal grace of the Holy Spirit, as much as many "super-Orthodox" would like to infer from these synodal and concilliar documents.
On the other hand, there is a paper trail that makes it abundantly clear that the Orthodox Church considers the Roman Catholic Church to be in heresy, starting with the Tomos of Gregory of Cyprus of 1285, which rejected the "council of Lyons" and the filioque. (Anastasios initiated a spirited dialogue on this document over at the Byzantine Catholic forum last month.) Other documents would include:
--the previous Synodikon of the Holy Spirit, composed during the middle 13th century during the Latin occupation of C'ople. This condemnation of classic "Frankish" triadology is to be chanted at Pentecost, although I am not aware of its use outside Greek-speaking Orthodoxy.
--the Synod of the Ecumenical Patriarch's pronouncement of 1484, which rejected the Council of Florence and stated that Latins should be received by chrismation.
--the Encyclical Letter of 1848 in response to Pope Pius IX, states the historic consciousness of the Orthodox Church and was issued over the names of the four patriarchs with the endorsement of Met. St. Philaret of Moscow. This is as close to a coordinated conciliar decree of "ecumenical" status within world Orthodoxy as one will encounter in "modern times."
Of the foregoing list, the Tomos of 1285 and the Encyclical Letter of 1848 come closest to having definitive, "ecumenical" status, although this characterization is perhaps fraught with qualifications.
An unbiased construction of these documents makes it clear that Orthodoxy has traditionally regarded the filioque and universal papal jurisdiction/supremacy as heresies, and has not hesitated to "cast away" those who hold such views.
Of course, there is a corresponding paper trail on the RC side, from Lyons II through the Council of Florence, through Trent, etc. (Pope Paul IV went so far as to unofficially downgrade Lyons II to a "local" council of the West that mishandled the affairs of the East).
Any honest Orthodox/Catholic dialogue, before speaking of a new "consciousness" in typical post-modern fashion, must simply come to grips in a straightforward fashion with this paper trail. I'm not saying it's absolutely impossible. (it's probably the case, as someone hinted on another thread started today, that the liturgical legacy of Vatican II may actually now be the most insurmountable obstacle between Roman Catholics and Orthodox, the point being that the noetic divide and ethos are as wide or wider than anything on paper).