CathInfo.com

Pope Celestine resigned in 1294.  He died 2 years later in 1296.  Pope Boniface VIII was elected also in 1294....long before Pope Celestine died. 

Did you know that at that time there was no detailed law of papal elections? The definition of "canonically-elected" changes over time. It depends on what the laws in place at the time of the papal election.

Here is the sad story of Pope Celestine V (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Celestine_V):

"Realizing his lack of authority and personal incompatibility with papal duties, he consulted with Cardinal Benedetto Caetani (his eventual successor) about the possibility of resignation. This resulted in one final decree declaring the right of resignation. He promptly exercised this right, resigning on 13 December 1294, after five months and eight days as pope. The former Celestine, now reverted to Pietro Angelerio, was not allowed to become a hermit once again. Various parties had opposed his resignation and the new Pope Boniface VIII had reason to worry that one of them might install him as an antipope. To prevent this he ordered Pietro to accompany him to Rome. Pietro escaped and hid in the woods before attempting to return to Sulmona to resume monastic life. This proved impossible, and Pietro was captured after an attempt to flee to Dalmatia was thwarted when a tempest forced his ship to return to port. Boniface imprisoned him in the castle of Fumone near Ferentino in Lazio, attended by two monks of his order, where Pietro died after 10 months at about the age of 81. His supporters spread the allegation that Boniface had treated him harshly and ultimately executed Pietro, but there is no clear historical evidence of this."

So, Pope Celestine asked the Cardinal who wanted to replace him for legal advice. The Cardinal told him it was a-ok to resign. Then, the fact that there were two possible papal claimants living at the same time caused a rebellion against Boniface VIII. So Boniface imprisoned Celestine.

And that is the reason that the Church decided, in its wisdom, to have a very detailed papal election law that could be adjusted to prevent abuses. The latest version is Universi Dominici Gregis (with the minor updates linked at the top of the online docuмent).

To refer to the Celestine/Boniface situation as evidence to defend your interpretation of the law is equivalent to going to court and telling the judge that speed limits did not exist before 1920 and, that being the case, you were well within your rights to go 100 mph in that school zone.

Do you mean Canon 912 (1983 Code)?

Any baptized person not prohibited by law can and must be admitted to holy communion.
Quilibet baptizatus, qui iure non prohibeatur, admitti potest et debet ad sacram communionem.

Which is essentially identical to Canon 853 (1917 Code)?

Any baptized person who is not prohibited by law can and must be admitted to holy communion.
Quilibet baptizatus qui iure non prohibetur, admitti potest et debet ad sacram communionem.

The only difference between the two formulations is the use of the subjunctive mood versus the indicative mood of the Latin verb prohibeo.

You're seriously playing the expert on canon law and you can't find this notorious canon? It's canon 844. I'll even provide you with the rest of the "magisterium" of your "popes." 

https://tinyurl.com/mhfm-communion-non-catholics
Canon 844.4, 1983 Code of Canon Law:
“If the danger of death is present or other grave necessity, in the judgment of the diocesan bishop or the conference of bishops, Catholic ministers may licitly administer these sacraments to other Christians who do not have full communion with the Catholic Church, who cannot approach a minister of their own community and on their own ask for it, provided they manifest Catholic faith in these sacraments and are properly disposed.”[6]
Canon 844.3, 1983 Code of Canon Law:
“Catholic ministers may licitly administer the sacraments of penance, Eucharist, and anointing of the sick to members of the oriental churches which do not have full communion with the Catholic Church, if they ask on their own for the sacraments and are properly disposed. This holds also for members of other churches, which in the judgment of the Apostolic See are in the same condition as the oriental churches as far as these sacraments are concerned.”[7]

Vatican II docuмent, Orientalium Ecclesiarum # 27:
“Given the above-mentioned principles, the sacraments of Penance, Holy Eucharist, and the anointing of the sick may be conferred on eastern Christians who in good faith are separated from the Catholic Church, if they make the request of their own accord and are properly disposed.”[2]

John Paul II, Catechism of the Catholic Church (# 1401):
“… Catholic ministers may give the sacraments of Eucharist, Penance, and Anointing of the Sick to other Christians not in full communion with the Catholic Church…”[4]

I repeat, do you accept the solemn, constant, universal teaching of your sect and its canon law that non-Catholics may receive Holy Communion or are you a hypocrite?

You still haven't posted any actual evidence for this.  You keep posting regs related to when a pope dies. 

We need to stop wasting our time with this nonsense.  It's utterly absurd, and not a single person who calls himself Catholic believes it except Angelus.