[gbcdoj]

The new, post-Conciliar version of the PBC has no actual authority. It can be freely ignored and should be if it contradicts the biblical encyclicals or Dei Verbum.

I doubt that "many" pronouncements of the Holy See contradict previous teaching, especially when consideration is limited to those documents which actually are part of the Magisterium. Oftentimes, as in the case of religious liberty, the "contradiction" is a result of misunderstanding. For instance, on the SSPX website I saw one article claiming the entire Syllabus Errorum was ex cathedra and that it contradicted Dignitatis Humanae. Of course, both assertions are wrong, but oftentimes this sort of thing is how traditionalists find "contradictions".

[ultima ratio]

Not so. I can think of at least four recent pronouncements which violate traditional Church doctrine, coming from the highest offices in the Vatican, even from Cardinal Ratzinger's own office. But sometimes even non-authoritative assertions end up being treated as official and authoritative, especially when the Pope lets such statements stand uncorrected. They find their way into the newspapers, into official discourse with other religionists, into Vatican policy--and into the minds of Catholics generally, doing great damage to the faith. One wonders what JPII thinks the papacy is for. It certainly isn't an office he is using to protect traditional beliefs. Cardinals and bishops routinely make pronouncements which contradict established doctrines and do so with impunity--which suggests a pretty casual attitude towards the faith in Rome generally. What traditionalists find incomprehensible is that the Pontiff doesn't impose discipline or hold any of this intellectual anarchy in check. To him it's not any big deal apparently. It should be, but it isn't.