[nika]

I propose the following remarks of Cardinal Ratzinger as defending the authority of Vatican II, in particular in its authority over the liturgy, even if Vatican II did not make any "definitive" statements.

Vatican II is upheld by the same authority as Vatican I and the Council of Trent, namely, the Pope and the College of Bishops in communion with him ...

It is likewise impossible to decide in favor of Trent and Vatican I, but against Vatican II. Whoever denies Vatican II denies the authority that upholds the other two councils ...
--Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger
Ratzinger Report

17. Divine assistance is also given to the successors of the apostles teaching in communion with the successor of Peter, and in a particular way, to the Roman Pontiff as Pastor of the whole Church, when exercising their ordinary Magisterium, even should this not issue in an infallible definition or in a "definitive" pronouncement but in the proposal of some teaching which leads to a better understanding of Revelation in matters of faith and morals and to moral directives derived from such teaching.

One must therefore take into account the proper character of every exercise of the Magisterium, considering the extent to which its authority is engaged. It is also to be borne in mind that all acts of the Magisterium derive from the same source, that is, from Christ who desires that His People walk in the entire truth. For this same reason, magisterial decisions in matters of discipline, even if they are not guaranteed by the charism of infallibility, are not without divine assistance and call for the adherence of the faithful.
--Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger
Instruction on the Ecclesial Vocation of the Theologian

[ultima ratio]

Traditionalists don't question the right of the pope and bishops to call a council into session. That is not the issue. The issue is whether its declarations--which were not binding and not infallible--were consistent with past Magisterial teachings. The Council, moreover, deliberately utilized a language which was ill-suited to defining anything clearly. Much of what was stated was ambiguous by design--intended to be understood in two ways--by traditionalists in one way, by modernists in another. This makes true "adherence" to such "teachings" impossible.

Even Ratzinger's final point--that while the Council declared nothing infallibly, it demands our adherence is simply false. Before we lend credence to murky ambiguities, Catholics owe allegiance to those magisterial definitions of the Church which are NOT ambiguous and which ARE infallible--such as the well-known declaration of Pius XII that the Mystical Body of Christ IS the Catholic Church. This seems to contradict the declaration of VII that the Church of Christ only SUBSISTS IN the Catholic Church--a very unclear formulation, deliberately ambiguous.