Replies

There is no guarantee that the decisions of a Pope are going to be of benefit to the faithful and if they are positively damaging to the Faith

Well then that means you are saying that you think Vatican I is wrong. Pius X believed it to be true.

Vatican I Documents from the reign of Pius IX. Session 4 (1870)
Session 4 Chapter 3:
The sentence of the Apostolic See (than which there is no higher authority) is not subject to revision by anyone, nor may anyone lawfully pass judgment thereupon [54]. And so they stray from the genuine path of truth who maintain that it is lawful to appeal from the judgments of the Roman pontiffs to an ecumenical council as if this were an authority superior to the Roman Pontiff.

I see nothing about resisting the Pope, I see nothing that tells the faithful that in matters of Church governance that the Pope must be resisted when he tried to "destroy" the Church.

Chapter 4 same session:
For the Holy Spirit was promised to the successors of Peter not so that they might, by his revelation, make known some new doctrine, but that, by his assistance, they might religiously guard and faithfully expound the revelation or deposit of faith transmitted by the apostles.

Expounding and developing the Faith is wholly under the Pontiff's control, and the Pontiff alone. In the specific case of Church Governance, the Pope is paradoxically "enlightened and guided" and at the same time "bound and chained" by a unique gift of the Holy Spirit. Even at the most defiled nadir of the Papacy, this was true. We have good Popes and bad Popes, but no Pope could make adultery a Sacrament, or poisoning a virtue, because the Holy Spirit prevents any such thing from happening.

You are in the realm of opposing Church Dogma, stated in this council.

In your case, in the case of the dissenters in the CTA, the SSPX and other schismatic organizations the prescription is clearer in modern language, "if you don't like it, lump it."