“What were they before they were “Catholic”?”
They were always Catholic. They did not understand that the Lefebvrists were schismatics. When they did, they left and rejoined the Church.
“Seriously, folks who attend SSPX services are not “SSPX”. Only the actual members of the Society are, well, members and they are all Catholic.”
Now, yes. Back then? No.
“What “decision” should they “accept”?”
This one? They must accept Vatican II, just like the rest of the Councils. If they sincerely believe that they pope is the head of the Church, then they have to accept the Councils too.
“And when did they move from no longer being excommunicated to being, in your words, “schismatic”? What determination of the Holy See are you basing that defamatory claim?”
As I said, that is my opinion. I regard their footdragging as evidence that they remain schismatic and are not ready. If they want to demonstrate their Catholicity, accepting this preamble was a good way to do so. They chose a route that indicates they are not ready at present.
Which is a pity. But, as I said, obedience is hard.
“They were always Catholic. .... When they did, they left and rejoined the Church.”
If they were always Catholic, what did they “rejoin”?
“As I said, that is my opinion.”
Right. A very protestant point of view.
“I regard their footdragging as evidence that they remain schismatic and are not ready.”
You have no standing to make such a decision. You are arrogating the duties of the Vatican. Why?