I think John Paul I is a true pope.

I'm a sedevacantist. That's the best way I can put it.

A sedevacantist doesn't believe that there's been a valid, legitimate, Catholic pope since the death of Pius XII because of many things, usually that the Pope is a heretic and heretics are not Catholics, ergo Pope Willy-Wonka XXIX is not the pope.

There's been some antipopes in the Vatican II religion, also known as the Novus Ordo. These people just, as the Novus Ordo does, make me really damn sad. I wish I could go to a valid, Catholic Mass anywhere in the world without worrying that there's rampant heresy in every service. But I digress.

I don't know about the number of the Novus Ordo antipopes, but there's two I have some doubt with. And then, I will get to my main point.

John XXIII - OK. Yes, he instituted the 1962 missal that put St. Joseph in the Canon and did some stuff. He died before anything really happened in Vatican II. Fuck Paul VI, by the way. He might be worse than Luther in the damage he did to the Church by installing the Novus Ordo and driving Catholics out of the faith. It's not the faggot pederasty that bankrupted dioceses, it's not the liturgical dancing, it's Montini the fucking Roman Methodist who decided going after the supper table of Protestant Europe was a good idea, suppressing Catholicism in the process.

John Paul I. He was ordained a bishop in 1958. Despite his status as a pope of the Novus Ordo era, I have reason to suspect he was a true pope. It is this simple reasoning:

He was pope for a month and three days! Literally! He was elected in September 1978 and died October of that year.

He had no time at all to preach heresy in public. If we did, we don't know!