Are you arguing that the See of Peter is vacant pursuant to 6 (vi) or otherwise)? If so, say so and specify your reasons for being a sedevacantist. Also, since the Counterreformation document cited refers only to matters arising PRIOR to one's elevation to the papacy, the date when you are alleging that JP II fell into heresy. Otherwise, please state your obedience to the pontiff because disobedience is not justified otherwise by the document cited.
The words alleged to have been communicated by Mary at LaSalette are nonetheless PRIVATE REVELATION and do not require belief. Do you claim otherwise? If you do, please specify what authoritative Church document commands doctrinal assent to private revelation.
In any event, who decides? Who executes the decision? Will there be a schismatic sort of Swiss guard charging the papal palace with halberds to remove the allegedly offending pontiff? Will bishop Fellay issue an SSPX fatwa and the pope scurry from the Vatican upon his command? Will it be a committee of SSPX's excommunicated bishops and schismatic priests theoretically under their non-existent authority? Perhaps a committee of Chris Ferraro, Tom Woods and Tom Drolesky and similarly sober scholars in love with their own opinions? The Remnant editorial board? The Angelus editorial board? Fr. Gruner?
Items 2 through 5 of Paul IV's document seem absent but he referenced "certain people who consider the study of the truth beneath them (and) should be driven out of the sheepfold of Christ and no longer continue to disseminate error from positions of authority..." Did he identify the "certain people?" What else has been edited out lest we consider the content?
Why is the language in the introductory paragraph of 6 bracketed which talks of the document remaining valid in perpetuity? Did Paul IV say so or not?
It sometimes seems like some of you guys would like to turn the papacy into a sort of ongoing Young Republican credentials fight of some sort wherein every schismatic or excommunicated Tom , Dock or Harriet can weigh in at any time with bloviation questioning the Catholicism of the pope based upon Tom or Dick or Harriet's OPIOS, OPIOT or OPIOF. This is a prescription for Heinz's 5700 varieties of Protestantism (each and every sect claiming to have the "right" understanding of Scripture or whatever as opposed to all the others), for religious anarchy posing as Roman Catholicism without warrant, or the same old same old of those thrown out of the game questioning the credentials of the umpire. In any event, there is no reason Catholics who are in communion with the Holy See to give such a satanic stew of arguments and prescriptions the time of day.
With the dissenters or without, the Roman Catholic Church will prevail to the end as promised by Jesus Christ.