According to the vatican, they're saying (and this is my understanding of it) that the SSPX has to accept vatican ii. If there's nothing dogmatic in it, as you claim, then why is the vatican insisting that the SSPX accept it?
First of all, Lumen Gentium contains several reiterations of previously defined dogmatic truths, e.g:
This is the one Church of Christ which in the Creed is professed as one, holy, catholic and apostolic, which our Saviour, after His Resurrection, commissioned Peter to shepherd, and him and the other apostles to extend and direct with authority, which He erected for all ages as "the pillar and mainstay of the truth". (LG 8)
Surely you don't deny that all Catholics are bound to accept the above statement, do you? Of course not. So, there are some things in Vatican II that are part of the deposit of Faith and which we must accept de fide, because they are indeed dogmatic and binding truths.
There are other things in Vatican II that are novel and in no way part of the deposit of Faith as defined dogmatically by previous Popes and Councils, for instance:
This Church constituted and organized in the world as a society, subsists in the Catholic Church, which is governed by the successor of Peter and by the Bishops in communion with him, although many elements of sanctification and of truth are found outside of its visible structure. These elements, as gifts belonging to the Church of Christ, are forces impelling toward catholic unity. (LG 8)
Thus we find in Vatican II the pure doctrine of the Faith set alongside novelty, error, and, perhaps, heresy.
So, the Vatican says that the SSPX must accept "Vatican II". Well, surely you must accept, as does the SSPX, certain
parts of Vatican II, i.e., those parts that are re-statements of previously defined Dogmatic Truth, right? In other words, you cannot reject
everything in Vatican II, or you will surely be guilty of heresy somewhere along the way.
What else in Vatican II must we accept as
strictly binding on our Catholic conscience? LG provides the answer:
Taking conciliar custom into consideration and also the pastoral purpose of the present Council, the sacred Council defines as binding on the Church only those things in matters of faith and morals which it shall openly declare to be binding. (LG, Appendix: 'NOTIFICATIONES' GIVEN BY THE SECRETARY GENERAL OF THE COUNCIL AT THE 123rd GENERAL CONGREGATION, NOVEMBER 16, 1964)
Are you paying attention, Parentsfortruth? The scandalous statement at LG 16 about Muslims adoring along with Catholics "the one and merciful God" is
not binding on our Catholic conscience because the Council did not openly declare it to be binding. Are you beginning to see??? Now, I understand that LG also states that we "ought to accept" everything else that is written in the docuмents of Vatican II "according to the mind of the Council". What in the world does that mean? That's a subject for another thread. Let's take one thing at a time.
Why does the Vatican tell the SSPX that they must "accept Vatican II"? Obviously, because Pope Benedict XVI and his cohorts want to save their baby. This ought to come as no surprise to anyone. Yet neither should it be a cause for alarm, because the Vatican cannot force the SSPX to accept that wooly, erroneous, and
possibly heretical statement at LG 16. Why not? Because it was not openly declared as binding.
It will be interesting to see how hard the Vatican presses the SSPX on accepting the Authentic (fallible) Magisterium, which is responsible for the scandalous statement in question.