francisco - Fr. Chazal believes the v2 claimants do not formally lose their office. So, he is referring to anti popes like cmri's schuckardt, the palmar pope, and bawden. I simply am commenting that he mentioned pivarunas(which is bold), but the cmri deserves to get picked on. Because, it is very bold(more so) to declare the NO claimants and all of the rites invalid(which the cmri does).
Fr. Chazal mentioned how st. pius x and pius xii changed how papal elections would proceed in future pontificates(until changed by a future pope), and that under them, there is nothing that prevents a heretic from being elected. This attacks fr. cekada's favorite argument angle(that the papal heretics "don't lose the office, because they cannot/didn't attain it"). Fr. Chazal should argue from this perspective. I think it is strong, and I want to hear more.