I would think that when the theological issues are resolved there will be two things which will prevent the Roman Catholic Pope and hierarchy coming into communion with the Church.
These are contraception and a second marriage after divorce.
Didn't think of these. The Roman Church's (exaggerated) focus on Humanae Vitae
and subsequent pastoral and theological "cloud" that surrounds this document will provide a somewhat significant barrier to reunion. The RC annulment process is quite lax, especially in the USA ('pay and pray', really). The Roman and Orthodox positions on marriage are not that far apart. An orthodox Orthodox priest will not take the decision to permit a second remarriage lightly. Likewise, Rome (or at least the American hierarchy) should take the annulment process more seriously. I believe that the Orthodox pastoral approach to remarriage and the Roman canonical-legal approach to remarriage can be reconciled if both parties return to a more serious and personal appraisal of the issue.
I was surprised to see a wide and even spectrum of concerns about reunification. I am convinced that Rome would gladly agree to let the Orthodox brethren continue to confess the Symbol of Constantinople without the filioque
. I do not see why the Latins need to recite it anymore, especially given that the theological disputes that occasioned the innovation are long concluded. Nevertheless, any "deal" would probably allow the Roman West to continue to recite the filioque.
As for the battle between Augustinian/Scholastic thought and Eastern theological traditions: again, I do not see Rome forcing Easterners to adopt "original sin" and its logical derivations, such as the Immaculate Conception. Also, I do not see an imposition of Scholasticism on the East. Pope Benedict himself subscribes to the notion that the Eastern and Western understanding of key theological issues are complementary orthodox viewpoints on dogma and doctrine, not adversarial and mutually heretical positions. The ball is in the Orthodox court on this one: given their general position that the filioque, Augustinian notions of sin and redemption, and Scholasticism are heresies, I doubt that many Orthodox would consent to the notion that both Eastern and Western teachings on important doctrines and dogmas are equally valid.
I am convinced, as I have stated many times before, that Rome's blind spot is not theological but political. The socio-political and historical wounds that the West have inflicted on the East have been quickly forgotten in the West but are still quite bitter in the East. So long as Rome neglects this important facet of dialogue, it will get nowhere.
Also, the Novus Ordo either has to go, or at least certain abusive practices (laypeople distributing Communion, gross liturgical abuse) must be conclusively abolished, for the Orthodox to even consider serious negotiation. This is where Orthodoxy can change Catholicism for the better -- and this is why the Orthodox should be key protagonists in the rescue of Catholicism, even if reunion does not come to pass.