Got my copy today, and while there are some good parts in this book, I couldn't help but notice this: “The Pope can be deposed legitimately, because, granted that power to depose the pope resides in the council apart from the pope, it must be able to assemble its scattered members, in order to depose him...

It's a non-dogmatic quote.

Ironically, the same William of Ockham that Fr. Chazal quotes as being a condemned heretic of a sedevacante type position is condemned for promoting something similar called conciliarism. William of Ockham (d. 1349) wrote some of the earliest docuмents outlining the basic understanding of conciliarism. His goal in these writing was removal of Pope John XXII, who had revoked a decree favoring ideas of the Spiritual Franciscans about Christ and the apostles owning nothing individually or in common. Some of his arguments include that the election by the faithful, or their representatives, confers the position of pope and further limits the papal authority. The universal church is a congregation of the faithful, not the Catholic Church, which was promised to the Apostles by Jesus. While the universal Church cannot fall into heresy, it is known that the Pope has fallen into heresy in the past.^[2] Should the pope fall into heresy a council can be convened without his permission to judge him.

Fr. Chazal tiptoes around this last point stating that the council must be called by the heretical pope but who is to judge him is unknown since to judge requires one to be a superior.

And that's about where I sensed that that particular section of the book was taking a ridiculous spin. I can't believe he even included this sentence in the book. It should've been edited out to save face...  Great uncertainty remains concerning how and by whom the pope who ought to be deposed will be judged to be deposed, for a judge, as such, is superior to the one who is judged.

CentroAmerica:  Fr. Chazal tiptoes around this last point stating that the council must be called by the heretical pope but who is to judge him is unknown since to judge requires one to be a superior.


Wait, so Fr Chazal believes that Francis (the heretical pope) has to call the Council that will depose him??   ???

Edit:  I wanted to switch the order of the two quotes above but can't seem to do it.

Well yeah, he pushes the idea that a Council can depose the pope (though who could judge him is unknown) but since this proposition is condemned as one of the propositions of William of Ockham (who he turns into a sinister forerunner of sedevacantists) the Council must be called by the pope (which was not condemned technically).
So it’s a really poor spin that does a disservice to the Church.