CathInfo.com

Not even a Council can depose a pope. But if it is a Council in union with a living pope denouncing a previous pope or declaring them to be antipopes, then yes that is possible.

Yet a council CAN declare the fact of a pope’s heresy, and that consequently God has deposed him.

Not even a Council can depose a pope. But if it is a Council in union with a living pope denouncing a previous pope or declaring them to be antipopes, then yes that is possible.

This is what St Robert Bellarmine says, Trento, in De Ecclesia, Bk I On Councils, Ch XXI On Lutheran Conditions:

"The third condition (my note - the third condition of the Lutherans is that the Roman Pontiff should not summon the Council, nor preside in it...) is unjust, because the Roman Pontiff cannot be deprived of his right to summon Councils and preside over them... unless he were first convicted by the legitimate judgement of a Council and is not the Supreme Pontiff... the supreme prince, as long as he is not declared or judged to have legitimately been deprived of his rule, is always the supreme judge... 

"It happens also that the Pope in a Council is not only the judge, but has many colleagues, that is, all the Bishops who, if they could convict him of heresy, they could also judge and depose him even against his will. Therefore, the heretics have nothing: why would they complain if the Roman Pontiff presides at a Council before he were condemned?

"The sixth condition (my note - the sixth condition of the Lutherans required to celebrate a Council is that the Roman Pontiff would absolve all prelates from the oath of fidelity, in which they have been bound) is unjust and impertinent. Unjust, because inferiors ought not be free from the obedience to superior, unless first he were legitimately deposed or declared not to be a superior... it is impertinent, because that oath does not take away the freedom of the Bishops, which is necessary in Councils, for they swear that they will be obedient to the Supreme Pontiff, which is understood as long as he is Pope, and provided he commands these things which, according to God and the sacred canons he can command; but they do not swear that they are not going to say what they think in the Council, or that they are not going to depose him if they were to clearly prove that he is a heretic."

These words seem to me a good argument favouring the 'Recognise and Resist' position: "THEY SWEAR THAT THEY WILL BE OBEDIENT TO THE SUPREME PONTIFF, ... PROVIDED HE COMMANDS THESE THINGS WHICH, ACCORDING TO GOD AND THE SACRED CANONS HE CAN COMMAND". It follows that the Pope can command things against God and the sacred canons in which case he is not to be obeyed, but to be resisted - and in the case of heresy, deposed, but not by any less than a Council, as is clearly the doctrine of Bellarmine.

Not even a Council can depose a pope. But if it is a Council in union with a living pope denouncing a previous pope or declaring them to be antipopes, then yes that is possible.

Just one more theologian on the subject - Suarez:

"I affirm: If he is a heretic and incorrigible, the Pope ceases to be Pope as soon as a declarative sentence of his crime is pronounced against him by the legitimate jurisdiction of the Church (...) In the first place, who should pronounce such a sentence? Some say that it should be the Cardinals; and the Church could undoubtedly assign this faculty to them, above all if it were established with the consent and decision of the Supreme Pontiffs, just as was done for the election. But to this day we do not read anywhere that such a judgment has been confided to them. For this reason, it must be affirmed that of itself it belongs to all the Bishops of the Church. For since they are the ordinary pastors and pillars of the Church, one should consider that such a case concerns them. And since by divine law, there is no greater reason to affirm that the matter involves some Bishops more than others, and since, according to human law, nothing has been established in the matter, it must necessarily be held that the matter should be referred to all of them, and even to a general Council. This is the common opinion of the doctors. One can read Cardinal Albano expounding upon this point at length in De Cardinalibus (q.35, 1584 ed, vol 13, p2)" - De Fide, Disp 10, Sect 6, n 10, pp 317-18