Belloc, do you not see the contradictions of ABL? If you are to try to follow his logic, or rather illogic, then there are two Churches. One Church that accepts and acts on a false Council, and another true Church within that Church, a breakaway unit known as the SSPX, yet sharing the same Pope... Of course, he was far from consistent when it came to determining where the Church was. I guess for him Rome had what you might call a "Conciliarity in flux," because sometimes it was Conciliar and false and an impostor, sometimes it was the real Church. But it's all theological gruel, so it is quite possible that at some point "ABL no longer could see."
To get to your post, that VII was "pastoral" has been debunked numerous times. Vatican II was an ecuмenical Council. Ecuмenical Councils cannot err on faith and morals.
This is one of the times I'm glad I know French, because as I learned from a French tradi site, in the Catechism of Pius X, the French version, there is something called the Petite Histoire de Religion. I don't know if it appears in the English version at all -- anyone else know? But here is what the French one says:
St. Pius X Catechism:
"Le concile œcuмénique ou général est une auguste assemblée où sont appelés par le Pontife Romain tous les Évêques de l’univers et autres prélats de l’Église et qui est présidée par le Pape en personne ou représenté par ses Légats. A cette assemblée, qui représente toute l’Église enseignante, est promise l’assistance du Saint-Esprit, et ses décisions en matière de foi et de moeurs, une fois confirmées par le Souverain Pontife, sont sûres et infaillibles comme la parole de Dieu."
"The ecuмenical or general council is an august assembly where all the Bishops of the world and other prelates of the Church are called by the Roman Pontiff, and which is presided over by the Pope in person or represented by his legates. To this assembly, which represents the entire teaching Church, the assistance of the Holy Ghost is promised, and its decisions in matters of faith and morals, once confirmed by the Sovereign Pontiff, are sure and infallible like the word of God."
I emphasize the legates since, I believe, Paul VI was often absent from VII proceedings.
So you see, there is no such thing as a "pastoral ecuмenical council." That's just another feint, a ruse, just like the idea that the Latin Mass was never abrogated. Come on, man. Use your Catholic sense. Do you think God would allow a Council to be implemented and forced down everyone's throat but at the same time say it is technically optional, just because some phony Pope calls it "pastoral"?
I have never understood this concept -- since when has the Church been in the business of putting together a Council that comes up with some optional doctrines, some teachings on faith and morals that we are free to take or leave? That is nonsense. Complete nonsense. The Church teaches, it doesn't present you with a buffet and say "Take what you like, or nothing at all." If we are to believe this idea that VII was just optional and not binding, you have reduced the Church to a teaching Church that doesn't teach, that merely suggests, like some stammering pimply teenager trying to work up the courage to ask the girl he likes if she'll go out with him. Like the Church is saying to the people "Hey guys, I came up with some new ideas today, what do you think? Yes, no?"
This is a complete inversion of roles. The Church teaches; the people receive. Yet if we're to believe SSPX, the Church only suggests; and the people either consent or they don't. This is madness, complete absurdity. Don't you see these "Popes" are just playing a game, they are completely phony! Pull your head out of your SSPX, ha ha.