Except that there is actually very little about Catholic doctrine which is genuinely objectional from the perspective of Byzantine/Orthodox theology;
Eh, that's a brush stroke that is far too broad to be accurate.
and the Catholic Church fully accepts all Orthodox doctrines, except the ecclesiology of the OC which claims itself to be the 'one, true church, outside of which there is no sacramental grace or salvation.'
Of course they reject (amongst other things) OC ecclesiology - they have their own, in which they claim themselves to be the 'one, true church, outside of which there is no sacramental grace or salvation.'
The Catholic Church accepts the fullness of faith, whereas the OC dismissed anything outside Byzantine liturgy, theology and spirituality.
No, on all 3 counts. Yes, the "Byzantine" liturgy predominates, but it has its roots in the Liturgy of Antioch, and Jerusalem has their own rite which predominates their worship. As for theology and spirituality, the spectrum is pretty broad, with influences from Egypt, Syria, Eastern Europe, Italy, and the Balkans all mixed together with the Eastern Roman.
The writings of Catholic mystics and theologians are considered to be worthless by most Orthodox. The closed-minded attitude of the OC towards anything outside its religious patrimony is something which I find, frankly, quite immature.
There are literally thousands upon thousands of writings on Orthodox spirituality, ecclesiology, theology, sacramental life, etc. Of course we're going to encourage people to read from that wealth of material, rather than seeking out the writings of those who do not believe as we do. Why seek a grain of truth that must be sifted out of an otherwise useless pile, when you can find a whole Mill of truth and be filled without having to sift? My closest friend from childhood would call it, "work smarter, not harder," which is a greater sign of maturity than forcing yourself to labor for little gain.