Pope St. Pius X: “None of the Cardinals may be in any way excluded from the active or passive election of the Sovereign Pontiff under pretext or by reason of any excommunication, suspension, interdict or other ecclesiastical impediment” (Vacante Sede Apostolica, 1904).
Pope Pius XII: “None of the Cardinals may, by pretext or reason of any excommunication, suspension, or interdict whatsoever, or of any other ecclesiastical impediment, be excluded from the active and passive election of the Supreme Pontiff”
(Vacantis Apostolicae Sedis, 1945).
These disciplines from Popes Pius X, and Pius XII on voting procedures at a Papal Conclave must to be understood by the "mind of the Church".
I have seen docuмentation that Roncalli was a manifest heretic prior to the October 1958 Conclave, which he voted at. As a Freemason he was a hidden heretic as well. He alluded detection to get into the 1958 Conclave to commit one of the gravest crimes in the history of the world. (The violent pushing aside of the true Pope elected on Oct 26, 1958).
So Roncalli's being a manifest heretic prior to the 1958 Conclave, made him ineligible to ever be pope, according to Pope Paul IV's infallible cuм ex Apostolatus Officio.
"The Rock has always withstood the test of time. But one will be entered into the House of God. Woe to man when
he [not God] places him upon the See of Peter for then, the Great Day of the Lord is at hand." -Pope St. Pius X:
If cuм Ex Apostolic was infallible (divine law) then it could not have been modified. To teach opposite would be heresy but that was precisely done by three pontiffs: Pius X, Benedict XIV, and Pius XII.
In any case, where is the docuмentation proving that Roncalli was a "Manifest Heretic"? and if his heresy was so undoubtedly
manifest, how come Pope Pius XII did not ever say anything, but in fact appointed him and placed him in positions of power within the Vatican?. Why there was no legal procedure conducted on him as required in the 1917 Code of Canon Law in cases of heresy?.