CathInfo.com

Meg can't wrap her head around the fact Catholics should love, respect and be of one mind with the Pope. So sad...

It’s unfortunate that a lot of people have destroyed the doctrines regarding the papal office in order to save an heretical degenerate. 

"The Very Rev. H. A. Ayrinhac comments on Canon 2197 [of the 1917 Code] in his General Legislation in the New Code of Canon Law (pp. 349-350), that public defection from the faith means: 'Public defection from the faith, by formal heresy or apostasy, with or without affiliation with another religious society. The offense must be public, that is, generally known or liable to become so before long. (Can. 2197)'"
(Kramer, Paul. To deceive the elect: The catholic doctrine on the question of a heretical Pope . Kindle Edition.)

“A formal act (i.e. a declaration that one has left the Church) is not required for the defection in canon 194 [of the 1983 Code]; the only requirement is that it be public (known or likely to become known).114 Neither is it required that the officeholder join another religion, although this could be an objective indication of defection."(John P. Beal, New Commentary on the Code of Canon Law pp. 226-7)
(Quoted in Kramer, Paul. To deceive the elect: The catholic doctrine on the question of a heretical Pope . Kindle Edition.)

There you go, Meg.  Both the 1917 Code and the 1983 Code do not require leaving the Catholic Church on the part of the heretic for a public defection of the FAITH to take place and that consequently results in the automatic loss of office.  Are you now convinced that your statement above is wrong?

No, I'm not convinced. You're references above have not changed from your previous statements. They still don't work; they are just the interpretations of your friend, Fr. Kramer. I'm not obliged to accept them. No one is. 

They can argue about depositus this and deponendus that til the cows come home, but none of that changes the fact that they attribute corruption to the Magisterium and to the Church's Public Worship.

They might find some who hold to the papa hereticus deponendus position, but I defy them to find or cite a single Catholic theologian who held that the Magisterium of the Church could become corrupt and that the Church could promulgate and use harmful Rite of Mass that's offensive to God.  Just one.  You'll find only the Protestants, Old Catholics, and Eastern Orthodox who attribute corruption to the Papal Magisterium.  While certainly not every papal teaching has the notes of infallibility, to attribute a degree of corruption that requires severing Communion with the Holy See and forming a parallel (schismatic) organization is contrary to the Church's indefectibility.  Sure, I might disagree with a Pope Pius XII's Allocution to Midwives or his statements about evolution, his 1955 Holy Week revision ... but none of that would come close to rising to the level of requiring that I sever communion with the Holy See and start my own Church.  I would respectfully disagree with Pope Pius XII ... from within the Holy Catholic Church.