"...The law deprives one under censure of his office and jurisdiction, in order to prevent the cleric involved from using his office to damage the Church and souls. Such is the case with Canon 188, which rules that if an individual (cleric) "abandons" the Faith, he automatically loses his office. The term "abandonment" of the Faith, in this context, does not mean "public heresy," but complete departure from the place where the individual held and exercised his office. Such a person is classified as a "fugitive" and a "fallen-away." Otherwise, an ecclesiastical tribunal must make an examination of the charges that the subject has "abandoned the Faith," find him guilty, declare that the censure has taken effect, and that by virtue of the law and his intransigence, declare him to have been deprived of his office. This authority may then rule as to whether any or all of his official acts were invalid retrospectively.

It must be understood that when the censure falls upon an individual "automatically," this is only in the "internal forum." An ipso facto excommunication has no effect upon the status of its recipient vis-a-vis the external forum, until the legitimate authorities of the Church establish and certify the incurrence of the censure. Thus, should a bishop preach heresy, he incurs this censure; but he is not thereby expelled from his bishopic, so that his diocese is without a head. That effect of the law occurs only after the juridical requirements  of the Code are fulfilled, and the proper authority ratifies the determinations of the proper ecclesiastical tribunal..." - Fr. Wathen, Who Shall Ascend?

Re: OP. Yes, he is. Pray for him, for the Cardinals and Bishops he appoints, and for his Successor, who is probably a Cardinal right now. There are still many conservative, Tradition-friendly Cardinals and Bishops in the Church.

I mean that's a fine opinion I was more just citing the law since some posts in this thread were suggesting that it's without basis. That a Pope losing office is a completely foreign concept nowhere to be found in tradition and I'm like that's just silly.

No he never was pope, pray that God puts an end to this counterfeit church from satan

Did you miss this one that I asked for your thoughts?....

Not at all, I just haven't got around to it yet as it requires more research on my part. :)

God Bless

Was Paul IV truly the pope? He's the one I quoted who forbids any and all judging. Again, the presumption is validity, not invalidity.

Yes, of course he wasn't talking about private judgement, and if that's all it was, if that were all there is to it, then we would not be having this discussion.

Being that the presumption is always that the pope is the pope, no one can judge him. This is why he essentially said: "Although he can be judged by no one, if he deviates from the faith, i.e. if he's a heretic, he may be contradicted."

For us that means whether he's the pope or not, if he's a heretic don't listen to him. Which is to say that Pope Paul IV is saying that popes can indeed be heretics / heretics can be popes. That's what he is saying.