I would like to make three points. First, there are areas where we have genuine areas of dogmatic differences. For example, we don't agree on the nature of the papacy. We also genuinely disagree on the question as to whether the damned in hell can eventually saved.
On other issues, I believe that while we may have some disagreement, there is not as great a gulf as some would like us to think. For example, the Immaculate Conception is debated endlessly, but I think that its silly. Yes, we disagree as to whether or not the Virgin Mary was conceived by merit of a special grace. However, Catholic, and many Orthodox can agree that Mary was in some way in a "state of grace" from the moment of creation. In fact, St. Gregory Palamas even believed in some such thing. This is not mean to down-play our difference in faith on the matter, but I don't think that the difference is insurmountable. Another example is the issue of the filioque. The manner in which Catholic theologians understand the filioque, such that the "by the Son" is secondary "by", really a "through", brings us much closer to one another than some would like to argue. We both agree that the Father is the monarch and source of the blessed Trinity. For Catholics God the Son participates in the spiration of the Holy Spirit but only in secondary manner, such the the Father remains the Source. What is more, even many Orthodox will admit that the Holy Spirit, in some way, proceeds through the Son, as per the teachings of St. John of Damascus. We may disagree on the nature of this procession, but we both admit that the Father is the source of the Trinity. I'm not trying to downplay the difference here. They are real issues that need to be addressed, but I think we can go to the other extreme exagerating our differences.
Finally, there are some areas in which we simply do not disagree, even though many would like to pretend we do. Transubstantiation is one of those areas. The riduclous discussions on this matter which have occured right here on OC.net have, conversations in which I have participated, have conviced me of as much. We both believe that the Euchrist is really Jesus. We both believe that it really looks like and acts like bread. Catholics just have a word for it called transubstantiation. Another such issue is purgatory. We both believe in post death purifcation that is not fun. We both pray for the souls going through such purifcation. We Catholics just have a word for it: purgatory. Finally, the nature of santifiction. We both believe that we are really divinized by God's divine life/energies. We both believe that such is God himself working in us, and thus, this Grace is uncreated. However, Catholics make one final distinction, and point out that the state of participating in God's uncreated life/Grace is a created state, since there once was a time when we were not participating in his saving Grace. Debates on these issues should just be dropped.