John XXII had a private opinion which he made public, against the ordinary magisterium of the Church. You accept him as Pope.
BXVI gave a private opinion which he made public apparently against the ordinary magisterium of the Church (we haven't seen his words yet). You deny BXVI is Pope ON THIS BASIS as a public heretic.
In reality you shoot first, then aim and ask questions later. You consistently assume what it is you should be proving and then add arrogance to your ignorance. A deadly combination.