I've been spending a lot of time thinking about exactly why I converted to Orthodoxy and what it is I have found within Orthodoxy that exists no where else. In the end the spiritual life offered by Orthodoxy is why I am Orthodox today. The blend of spiritual life I have been most exposed to is Athonite Monasticism, as I live only an hour's drive from Saint Anthony's Monastery. It is there that I have seen what Orthodoxy truly is; it was there that I realized Orthodoxy is something so unique....
If tomorrow there was a union between Old and New Rome here is what I realistically envision would happen in the RCC:
1) No Filioque in the Creed
2) Greatly reduced Papal authority (basicly Vatican I and II would have to be axed or really revised)
3) Liturgical revisions (but probably not a very large scale)
4) Affect on daily parish life, little to none
And number 4 is what is problematic and why ecumenism will never work. A superficial union will not drive Barlaam out of the Latin Church, i.e it won't create the Orthodox spirit. While the united church would be Orthodox in doctrine it would be the church of Barlaam in praxis - and thus not Orthodox in the end. To my knowledge Metropolitan Hierotheos of Nafpaktos never writes against Ecumenism directly, but IMO his writtings stand as a stalwart defense against it. The cure of the soul is only offered within the context of living Orthodoxy and Barlaamist united Church wouldn't off this - thus it would be a sham.
Any thoughts on this for discussion?