When I wrote my post to ebb tide, the Popes from the Borgias came to my mind, and not because of the Showtime series made of them, but from actual historical fact.
The gleeful Protestants I mentioned like to dig up (no pun intended) Pope Formosus' "trial" by Pope Stephen, the entire affair being rich in scandal. Both are no "blessed" certainly.
All of these Popes (and more) are all "pre-conciliar" (obviously). Which is why I'm often surprised and perhaps a bit befuddled when some bandy that term about as if it's some badge of honor for any Pope who happens to fall in that category by history (and by implication a badge of dishonor for any Pope "post-conciliar" as it were).
Were there mighty men of God in the Chair of St Peter before Vatican II (and even I): yes. But there sure were some stinkers too, that can't (and shouldn't) be swept under the rug in some vain attempt to implicate Vatican II.
The fact is the Church is the same Church since Christ, sometimes led by men weaker than others (to put it mildly). Neither council is a dividing line that can be used to determine a greater propensity of doctrinal or personal "shadiness". The bad Popes in the past never taught error as Vicar of Christ, thus we can say with confidence to our Protestant detractors, the gates of hell have never prevailed. However this doctrinal (not to mention dogmatic) purity are certainly not the result of any effort to "feed His sheep" on the part of the pre-conciliar Popes mentioned.
Exactly!!! ...and the gates of hell shall not prevail against the Church even though the sin of humans still takes place. Thus it has always been and shall continue to be.
Selah!
;-)