Let's not revise history on this score either. Throughout history the Church did rule againt mixing with the Jews, and especially against common prayer with the Jews or working for them.
The social and economic prohibitions were all for the given demographic, economic, and historical context. The prohibition of religious concelebration is, of course, natural.
I read the Mystery of the Jews briefly (SJackson showed it to me). The first half of it is an exegesis of the confrontation between Jesus and the Sanhedrin, seen in the light of Pauline warnings against legalism and carnality. That was the context in which the contrast between Christianity and Judaism was drawn. There was nothing irrational or hateful about that part, anymore than the homilies of St. Peter on the steps of the Temple were irrational or hateful.
The "conclusions" that the authors drew were, at least some of them, painful to read, as they superimposed the historical positions of the Church, and the foundational tenets of Christianity upon the modern culture war with breathtaking crudity. To take them seriously one has to believe that the Wall Street banker, the porn producer, the crypto-Marxist atheist journalist, so long as they are of Jewish ethnic stock, all present a common anti-Catholic front together with a pious Orthodox rabbi (with whom the Catholic social teaching agrees 100%) -- and with none of them a faithful Catholic should have anything to do. That crazy theory in itself is so pharisaically legalistic, it can put any Hassidic purist to shame.
It is a good thing they give this stuff less prominence, but it should not be taken as if no tension exists between the two faiths.
The nice thing about the WWW, it will always be out there. I think the Vatican has handled this in a way that any tension will be, was, very short lived. I can see their views as a source of tension in the Church, unless they're truely abandoning all of them.
No one is trying to revise history. There was a time in the history of the Church when it had married popes who fathered children and appointed them cardinals. The Church is not static; she continues to grow in wisdom, guided by the Holy Spirit. Even the worst of the popes never once erred in matters of faith or morals.
The "conclusions" that the authors drew were, at least some of them, painful to read, as they superimposed the historical positions of the Church, and the foundational tenets of Christianity upon the modern culture war with breathtaking crudity.
That is why we have Councils. But the SSPX rejected VCII and some also went so far as to view the subsequent popes as false. The real question here is how deeply embeded is this teaching in their community? If the original ariticle was not that bad, then obviously they recognize their shameful comments. Their repentance, if it is sincere, should be commensurate with their actions over the past 40+ years. It should be in person, before Christ's earthly representative, who will expect them to embrace the documents from VCII, especially Nostra Aete.