NOW: "White Smoke, Valid Pope" Position Refutation Attempt

[Conclavist]

http://novusordowatch.org/2017/03/white-smoke-anti-pope/

"In March of 2001, "Fr." Harrison published a brief article in This Rock magazine that was meant to be a refutation of Sedevacantism. Entitled "White Smoke, Valid Pope", the piece argues that a heretical Pope would govern the Church illicitly but validly. In other words, according to Harrison's thesis, a Pope who is a heretic would indeed be a true and valid Pope, but his papacy would not be "authorized" by God or the Church and therefore gravely sinful and contrary to canon law. "

https://www.catholic.com/magazine/print-edition/white-smoke-valid-pope

^I don't know if this has been refuted or discussed, just reposting for any additional insight or commentary.

The central thesis of "White Smoke, Valid Pope", however, sidesteps the whole issue about who was or wasn't a public or private heretic before his election as Pope, and argues instead that even a public heretic would ascend to the Papacy validly
"Fr." Harrison:
I will not attempt here to investigate and evaluate such charges, because, even if they were true, the resulting excommunications—surprising as this may sound—would not have disqualified Cardinal Roncalli from being validly elected as Pope.

Problem is deflection from discussion proving Roncalli's heresy. I hope to have something up tonight on this. But it is very interesting to me that there is very little investigation in to this...

[awkwardcustomer]

http://novusordowatch.org/2017/03/white-smoke-anti-pope/

"In March of 2001, "Fr." Harrison published a brief article in This Rock magazine that was meant to be a refutation of Sedevacantism. Entitled "White Smoke, Valid Pope", the piece argues that a heretical Pope would govern the Church illicitly but validly. In other words, according to Harrison's thesis, a Pope who is a heretic would indeed be a true and valid Pope, but his papacy would not be "authorized" by God or the Church and therefore gravely sinful and contrary to canon law. "

How could the papacy of a true and valid Pope be not authorized by God or the Church?  If a Pope's papacy was not authorized by God or the Church then surely the Pope would only be a 'pope'.

A true and valid but unauthorized Pope.  How could this be possible?

[Conclavist]

...It sounds kind of like taking sedeprivationism a step further or a variation on that theme or sedeplenism...

[awkwardcustomer]

...It sounds kind of like taking sedeprivationism a step further or a variation on that theme or sedeplenism...

It sounds like desperation. 

[Bonaventure]

If you want to reject an ordinal or a cleric's orders, that's your prerogative, but we won't allow scare quotes around a Catholic priest's regular title.

[Conclavist]

I do hold them in doubt but it was also NOW's convention

EDIT: Modified, should be ok now