No, what makes you think that's what I'm saying? The pope is condemning all things V2 so now the Church is where it was pre-V2. What reason would the pre-V2 popes even enter the picture?
It can be confusing when you evade the question and are vague
I said:
I asked if you believe that there is a possibility the Conciliar popes are declared false popes in the future. You said, "absolutely". Why do you think it is absolutely possible that it could happen? Would you say the same regarding Pius X, Pius IX, Leo XIII, etc., or is there something different between them and the Conciliar popes?
You replied:
You just answered why I do not think any such declaration will be made, although anything is possible
See, this is confusing, because I'm not sure
how I "answered" why you do not think any such declaration will be made, and I never even asked if you
think it will happen to begin with. You said there is "absolutely" a possibility of the Conciliar popes being declared false popes by a future pope. I asked if this is because there is a difference between the pre V2 and Conciliar popes that would cause you to say that..
or if you would say the same ("absolutely" a possibility) regarding any past pope at all.
So, are you saying:
A) That the V2 popes differ in such a way from the pre-V2 popes that there is "absolutely" a possibility of them being declared false popes in the future, and not the pre-V2 popes? You said you would be "cool" with whatever the Church declares regarding the Conciliar popes
OR
B) That there is "absolutely" a possibility of a future pope declaring any past pope at all a false pope? Would you also be "cool" with this, or just whatever the Church declares regarding the Conciliar popes?