>> As for those who knowingly, publically and pertinaciously profess heresy, e.g. the heretical doctrines of "Vatican II"<<
YOU are no longer Catholic. If Vatican II was not doctrine, it cannot be heresy. If Vatican II was doctrine, than it was infallibly stated doctrine, making you the heretic. Or since you reject the authority and the authenticity of the Popes and Magisterium who proclaimed it, you are apostate.
Mortalium Animos, On Religious Unity, Encyclical of His Holiness Pope Pius XI, January 6, 1928
One cannot overturn previous teaching of Christ and of His Church. New teaching which contradicts either is not of Christ nor of His Church.
It is only of satan.
"If Vatican II was not doctrine, it cannot be heresy. If Vatican II was doctrine, than it was infallibly stated doctrine, making you the heretic"
1. You are wrong on all counts. A doctrine simply means a teaching. Vatican II was full of doctrines. But none of them were infallible--except those which had already been defined as such by previous popes and councils. Disbelief in any of the new teachings would not make anybody a heretic.
2. All dogmas are doctrines, but not all doctrines are dogmas. Dogmas are doctrines concerning the deposit of faith which are infallible and binding on all the faithful. Failure to believe a defined dogma would make someone a heretic. But failure to believe a non-dogmatic doctrine would not make someone a heretic.
3. Not all doctrines are infallible. To be infallible they must be clearly defined and made explicitly binding on the universal Church. No Vatican II declaration was ever so defined. In fact, the Council fathers explicitly declared that no statement--even those labeled as dogmatic--were to be considered binding, since the purpose of the Council was pastoral. Hence these declarations were all-too-fallible.