>>577059
Vatican II by itself was actually pretty fine
the NO Mass as envisaged by V2 was based off an earlier form of the Mass rather than a new invention
unfortunately it took place around the same time a lot of modernists entered the Church and these modernist priests often butcher the Mass under the guise of the "spirit of V2". To add to that V2 was originally going to be more orthodox but the Rhine group blocked a number of documents, including a condemnation of communism, that were originally going to be part of V2.
In regards to papal infallibility, bear in mind it only applies to dogma and ex cathedra statements. The general idea is that the Lord wouldn't allow His vicar to lead the Church into error. Unfortunately, a lot of people, including Catholics, take this to mean that the Pope is always infallible, which is bordering on heresy and is absurd.
If you are going to leave the Church though, which I wouldn't advise (extra Ecclesiam nulla salus etc. I'd advise instead going to TLM or extraordinary form Mass instead of NO if you dislike NO) then Orthodox is at least better than sedememes.
TL;DR: V2 itself is fine, but has been misinterpreted and the actual documents of V2 are often ignored in favor of the so-called "spirit of V2", the NO when done correctly is mostly fine and Papal Infallibility does make some sense, though it needs to be more emphasised just how limited it is.
>>577068
It doesn't hinge on infallibility of the Pope.
>Purgatory is something else that isn't explicitly expressed in the bible.
While purgatory isn't expressly talked about in the Bible, there are parts that indicate that there is probably a purgatory.
We know that Hell is eternal, for example, however in 2 Maccabees 12 the following is said (along with other references to praying for the dead):
"It is therefore a holy and wholesome thought to pray for the dead, that they may be loosed from sins."
and:
"(For if he had not hoped that they that were slain should rise again, it would have seemed superfluous and vain to pray for the dead,)"
How can someone be loosed from sins if Hell is eternal punishment?
It makes little sense unless there is some way by which sins are cleansed, else there would be no need to pray for the dead, no?
We are also told in Matthew:
"Make friends quickly with your accuser, while you are going with him to court, lest your accuser hand you over to the judge, and the judge to the guard, and you be put in prison; truly I say to you, you will never get out till you have paid the last penny"
Which is likely referring to purgatory
we are also told that nothing unclean may enter heaven, but very few people are entirely sinless so how else could we sinners enter heaven?
But by cleansing and penance perhaps?
Several Church fathers also referred to praying for the dead on the anniversary of their death and such. If the souls had already been received into heaven there would be no need and if the souls were condemned to hell then what would be the purpose? Hell is eternal after all.
>Vatican II completely eliminated said tradition.
As said above, spirit of Vatican II versus what Vatican II actually said. The documents of Vatican II are fine, the interpretation by the liberal modernists is the issue.