Anybody who rejects Vatican II is not Catholic [and I care not for the sedevacantist objections]. Full stop. The SSPX accepts Vatican II. How can you not? It was a valid ecumenical council.Assertum non est demonstratum
("To assert is not to demonstrate").
Stated briefly, Vatican II: 1.
clearly promotes a false ecclesiology (LG 8.2: "subsists in;" made worse by later CDF documents and contrary to the Holy Office decision of September 1864 to the bishops of England),2.
teaches that non-Catholics are indiscriminately members of the Body of Christ (UR 3, contrary to Mystici Corporis Christi
that heretical sects are used by the Holy Ghost as means of salvation and that their liturgical actions are salvific (UR 3.3-4, contrary to Florence
: Dz. 714 and both Popes Leo XIII - Satis Cognitum
- and Pius XII - Mystici Corporis Christi
teaches a false notion of ecumenism (UR 4.2: "everyone gains a truer knowledge and more just appreciation of the teaching and religious life of both Communions... common good of humanity"; contrary to Pope Pius XI - Mortalium Animos
- and the Holy Office - December 1949 - under Pope Pius XII),5.
encourages Catholics to engage in communicatio in sacris
with schismatics (UR 15.3, contrary to 1917 CIC
teaches that schismatic celebrations of the Holy Eucharist build up the Church of God (UR 15, contrary to Pope St. Gregory the Great: "The holy universal Church teaches that it is not possible to worship God truly except in her;" quoted by Pope Gregory XVI in Summo Iugiter Studio
erroneously teaches that Christ united Himself with each man in His Incarnation (GS 22; definitive interpretation given in Pope John Paul II's RH: “For this reason man — every man without any exception — has been redeemed by Christ, because with man — every man without any exception — Christ is in some way united, even when man is not aware of it.”) and8.
inverses the ends of Holy Matrimony (GS 48; see also CCC 1601; contrary to the 1917 CIC
Many people have good reason(s) to reject the Second Vatican Council. You not wanting to hear a particular argument says absolutely nothing about its veracity.
Where is this mysterious infallible document that says a Pope couldn't foster a harmful rite on the Church?
Please see this thread for numerous references and a debate on the issue: http://catholicforum.fisheaters.com/index.php?topic=3435969.0
(Are Universal Disciplinary Laws Infallible? AQ Discussion
P.S. - I haven't addressed the Second Vatican Council's teaching on collegiality because that's an issue with which I need to become more familiar.