And it's even more credible because he seems to mention this in passing and does not put any emphasis on it as being particularly important ... since he doesn't really understand or care about the theological ramifications, viewing the papacy to be similar to any political office.

.

I don't see how this makes it any more credible. He mentions it because it suits his agenda, which is to portray the Church as a corrupt and incompetent institution. Telling a story about the leader of an institution getting overthrown by an internal faction right as he is getting elected definitely makes the Church look corrupt and incompetent.

The way books work is that when an author makes a claim, he has to put a footnote providing the source for his claim. This allows people to verify that his claim is true. The more serious a book is, the more footnotes it has. Now, if someone puts in a footnote that cannot be verified, that detracts from the credibility of the book and outright negates the claim attached to that footnote, since it is now not only an unsupported assertion, but an assertion "supported" by a footnote that is either a deception or the result of incompetence, either of which further detract from the assertion that has the footnote.

So, when trads try to track down Williams's footnotes and find they are false, and Williams refuses to provide any explanation for why the footnotes are false, this destroys both Williams's credibility and even more so the claims which he supported with false footnotes.

What makes his claim even more credible is where he adds the detail that Siri took the papal name Gregory XVII.  If he was just making something up, where did he get that particular detail.  Also, Williams was capitalizing on his credibility due to his background, which makes it unlikely that he'd make something up just to mention it in passing that might compromise his credibility.

Nah, the name "Gregory XVII" had been circulating for years before this book came out, mainly from Gary Giuffre and Malachi Martin, who likely stole it from Giuffre.

And if you think Paul Williams was a man who had any concern about his credibility, please just read some of this ridiculous book we're talking about. It's literally a kitchen-sink of copy-pasta of urban legends and lies against the Church. It's about on the level of Maria Monk. Just spend a few minutes reading random parts of that book; seriously it won't take you long to get a feel for it and for its author.

Siri Theory for the win, as the best explanation for what happened to the Church.

No comment on the antichrist's stupid "law."

Anyone with eyes and a brain can also see that the man who gave communion to the founder of a Protestant sect, denied the resurrection of the body, prayed in a mosque, said it is legitimate to read the OT so it doesn't point to Christ, that eastern schismatics need not accept Vatican I, preached heresy on and on and on, is the same kind of usurper as Bergoglio.

Universi Dominici Gregis is just the most recent revision of the papal law of elections. The same essential requirements can be seen in the papal law promulgated by Pius XII

https://www.vatican.va/content/pius-xii/la/apost_constitutions/docuмents/hf_p-xii_apc_19451208_vacantis-apostolicae-sedis.html

Here is what Pius XII says about the process of the election when there is a resignation:

91. What has been said so far about the previous election and about the actual election of the Roman Pontiff, we declare that all this must be observed even if it happens that a vacancy in the Apostolic See occurs through the resignation of the Supreme Pontiff.

91. Quae de praecedentibus electionem et de ipsa electione Romani Pontificis hactenus dicta sunt, haec omnia servanda esse declaramus etiam si contingat vacationem Sedis Apostolicae occurrere per renuntiationem Summi Pontificis.


Pius XII's papal election law, Vacantis Apostolicae Sedis, allows a papal election to be held ONLY AFTER the death, funeral, and burial of the previous Pope. It does not differ in essentials from Universi Dominici Gregis. 

... this clearly means that the funeral rites for a deceased pope should be observed before the conclave gets underway.  If no deceased pope, then no funeral rites.  There is no one who can force a man to remain pope if he wills to resign.

I am not saying that a Pope cannot resign if he wants to. Of course, he can resign. Why do you keep saying that?

You seem to think that a papal resignation automatically triggers a papal election. You are incorrect about that, as the law of papal elections makes clear.

Even if a Pope chooses to resign (which he can do), the papal election law must still be followed precisely. And that law requires the death, funeral, and burial of the Pope BEFORE a new election can happen.

A papal resignation PRIOR TO the death of a Pope (under this law) will create a situation wherein the Church officials will still carry on day-to-day business through its curial offices in the Apostolic See, using as their guide the laws that have been put in place by the retired Pope. But these Curial officials cannot make new laws or teach new doctrines during that period.

Again, only after the death, funeral, and burial of the Pope can a new election be held. The new Pope can then start making new laws and teach doctrine.

Even if a Pope chooses to resign (which he can do), the papal election law must still be followed precisely. And that law requires the death, funeral, and burial of the Pope BEFORE a new election can happen.

  I think you're missing a few procedures.  I'm sure there's a sub-category of regs which deal with the unique situation of a resignation.


Didn't +Benedict also update the conclave laws, after JP2?  I'm sure the +Benedict "legal team" looked all this over.  It's not that complicated (i.e.  If a pope resigns, the requirements for a death/burial are ignored.  Move on to next procedure.)

  I think you're missing a few procedures.  I'm sure there's a sub-category of regs which deal with the unique situation of a resignation.


Didn't +Benedict also update the conclave laws, after JP2?  I'm sure the +Benedict "legal team" looked all this over.  It's not that complicated (i.e.  If a pope resigns, the requirements for a death/burial are ignored.  Move on to next procedure.)

No, I'm not "missing a few procedures." If they are not in the papal election law, which anyone who wants to know the truth can read for themselves, the procedures do not exist.

And yes, Benedict did update Universi Dominici Gregis on some small matters in Normas Nonnullas, promulgated on 22 February 2013. At the top of the Universi Dominici Gregis webpage, a very prominent link to Normas Nonnullas is also provided:

https://www.vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/en/motu_proprio/docuмents/hf_ben-xvi_motu-proprio_20130222_normas-nonnullas.html

In Normas Nonnullas, some minor changes are made to the timing of events and voting procedures. There are no changes to the basic requirements of death, funeral and burial BEFORE the election of a new Pope takes place requirement.

The interesting thing is that you have no problem believing that the Vatican could have done any number of deceptive things since the 1960s. But, for what ever reason, you think it impossible that Bergoglio was not canonically-elected by the same people who have been perpetuating the other deceptions.

We are to trust the Cardinals when it comes to Bergoglio's election, even though it contradicts the law that we can read with our own eyes?

Found this in about 5 minutes...

+JP2's Universi Dominici Gregis
77.
I decree that the dispositions concerning everything that precedes the election of the Roman Pontiff and the carrying out of the election itself must be observed in full, even if the vacancy of the Apostolic See should occur as a result of the resignation of the Supreme Pontiff, in accordance with the provisions of Canon 333 § 2 of the Code of Canon Law and Canon 44 § 2 of the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches.


+Benedict's Normas Nonnullas
No. 37.
"I furthermore decree that, from the moment when the Apostolic See is lawfully vacant, fifteen full days must elapse before the Conclave begins, in order to await those who are absent; nonetheless, the College of Cardinals is granted the faculty to move forward the start of the Conclave if it is clear that all the Cardinal electors are present; they can also defer, for serious reasons, the beginning of the election for a few days more. But when a maximum of twenty days have elapsed from the beginning of the vacancy of the See, all the Cardinal electors present are obliged to proceed to the election."

Found this in about 5 minutes...

+JP2's Universi Dominici Gregis
77.
I decree that the dispositions concerning everything that precedes the election of the Roman Pontiff and the carrying out of the election itself must be observed in full, even if the vacancy of the Apostolic See should occur as a result of the resignation of the Supreme Pontiff, in accordance with the provisions of Canon 333 § 2 of the Code of Canon Law and Canon 44 § 2 of the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches.


+Benedict's Normas Nonnullas
No. 37.
"I furthermore decree that, from the moment when the Apostolic See is lawfully vacant, fifteen full days must elapse before the Conclave begins, in order to await those who are absent; nonetheless, the College of Cardinals is granted the faculty to move forward the start of the Conclave if it is clear that all the Cardinal electors are present; they can also defer, for serious reasons, the beginning of the election for a few days more. But when a maximum of twenty days have elapsed from the beginning of the vacancy of the See, all the Cardinal electors present are obliged to proceed to the election."

As I demonstrated in my last post, you have the wrong model in your head. You think that the Apostolic See is ONLY made up of the Roman Pontiff. You are incorrect in that assumption, according to 1983 Canon law: 

Can. 361 In this Code, the term Apostolic See or Holy See refers not only to the Roman Pontiff but also to the Secretariat of State, the Council for the Public Affairs of the Church, and other institutes of the Roman Curia, unless it is otherwise apparent from the nature of the matter or the context of the words.

The Apostolic See is not "lawfully vacant" until the death of the Roman Pontiff as UDG 14 states:

14. According to the provisions of Article 6 of the Apostolic Constitution Pastor Bonus, at the death of the Pope all the heads of the Dicasteries of the Roman Curia — the Cardinal Secretary of State and the Cardinal Prefects, the Archbishop Presidents, together with the members of those Dicasteries — cease to exercise their office.

Here is Pastor Bonus, 6:

Art. 6 — On the death of the Supreme Pontiff, all moderators and members of the dicasteries cease from their office. The camerlengo of the Roman Church and the major penitentiary are excepted, who expedite ordinary business and refer to the College of Cardinals those things which would have been referred to the Supreme Pontiff.

Search Pastor Bonus all you want. You will not find that upon "resignation" of the Pontiff that the Curial officials cease from their office. Only upon the death of the Pontiff do the curial officials lose their offices. Therefore, until the death of the Pontiff, the Apostolic See (which includes the Curia according to Canon 361) cannot possibly be lawfully vacant.

https://www.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/apost_constitutions/docuмents/hf_jp-ii_apc_19880628_pastor-bonus.html