The Nova Praevia says JUST THE OPPOSITE. It makes NOTHING binding because nothing anywhere in the Council was formally declared as such! Do you even understand the things you are posting? Here is a comment from Ferrara and Woods on this, from a footnote on page 88 of The Great Facade, explaining the reason for this Nota:
"The most famous example [of the Pope acting decisively to prevent the Second Vatican Council from promulgating outright errors as Catholic doctrine] is Pope Paul's intervention forcing the Council to include the Nota Praevia to Lumen Gentium, which correct's LG's [Lumen Gentium's] erroneous suggestion that when the Pope exercised his supreme authority he does so only as head of the apostolic college, wherein the supreme authority resides. Paul was alerted to this problem by a group of conservative Council Fathers, who finally persuaded him of LG's destructive potential: 'Pope Paul, realizing finally that he had been deceived, broke down and wept.' Wiltgen, The Rhine Flows into the Tiber, p. 232."
In fact, Pope Paul insisted that nothing be defined as binding without specifically so stating--and nothing ever was. How then can JPII excoriate the Archbishop for anything he believed contrary to the views of the Council?This is especially blameworthy, given the Pope's own history of casually tolerating even the most openly heretical opinions expressed by more liberal bishops. It is a double standard that is disgraceful and which will disgrace his memory for many centuries to come.
As for the citations of which you speak--these must be taken with a grain of salt. Why? BECAUSE NO POPE MAY DEMAND OBEDIENCE TO NOVEL DOCTRINES WHICH OPPOSE THE TEACHING MAGISTERIUM OF THE CHURCH WHICH HAS ALREADY BEEN CLEARLY EXPRESSED. The preconciliar popes warned against the heresies of indifferentism and syncretism, for instance. Nothing JPII says can undo their doctrinal condemnations of precisely what he is trying to impose throughout his Church, even to the point of suppressing what is unique to Catholicism. Either he or they are wrong--and it cannot be they! --They have the entire history of the Church for twenty centuries on their side!
Binding on the Church - that is, irreformable and hence infallible. Non-infallible teaching is also binding - the contrary is a condemned proposition of the Syllabuses of Bl. Pius IX and St. Pius X.
Nothing JPII says can undo their doctrinal condemnations of precisely what he is trying to impose throughout his Church, even to the point of suppressing what is unique to Catholicism.
The Pope is not trying to impose syncretism and indifferentism on the Church. Even if we are to grant the Assisi events as examples of these errors, they were not imposed on the Church but merely the Pope's private actions.
But in discussing the council - syncretism and indifferentism are not taught in its documents.