The 1917 Code of Canon Law clearly allowed intercommunion in certain limited circumstances (i.e. danger of death). So the current Catholic position predates the 1960's. The 1960's saw what was tantamount to a total lifting of the ban of 1729.
From the Catholic perspective, the problems with the East have always centered around the Bishops. As far as we are concerned, the lay Orthodox are fully Catholic provided that they hold no heresies. Their Bishops may or may not be involved in some level of schism or even heresy from our POV depending on their own position on various disputed matters. But just because one's Bishop is possibly in error, does not mean that his laity are also in error, and until the Church removes him from office by declaring him deposed if he is actually disobedient, the Bishop's lay faithful owe him reverent submission on all things not contrary to divine and natural and ecclesial law. Last I checked, the Pope hasn't removed any Eastern Bishops.
" Last I checked, the Pope hasn't removed any Eastern Bishops."
LOL! Not lately, anyway, and there was a time when we were grateful for his help in getting rid of some real beauts!
Mutatis mutandis, and on a very different level, the principle also applies to the Protestant, I suspect. Many Protestant Christians are not protesting anything and simply follow the faith they have always known, including the defective praxis that is also the only thing they know. I would hold the Protestant ministers to a different standard because they have made an informed decision to separate themselves and their flock from the Church.