Pope Alexander VI.
I always get those two confused.
…Notwithstanding these and similar actions, which might seem to entitle him to no mean place in the annals of the papacy, Alexander continued as Pope the manner of life that had disgraced his cardinalate (Pastor, op. cit., III, 449 152)…So little have Catholic historians defended him that in the middle of the nineteenth century Cesare Cantù could write that Alexander VI was the only Pope who had never found an apologist…
Interestingly, though, there is one benefit that we can see from the Rodrigo Borgia papacy: if Holy Mother Church can survive such an evil man without permanent doctrinal damage, it demonstrates, in a way, that the Holy Spirit must be with the Church (while still allowing Her children to make bad choices).
Francis Borgia was a widower when he became a Jesuit. One of his descendants was Queen of England—Catherine of Braganza, wife of King Charles II. They had no children so none of the later British monarchs are descended from Alexander VI (unless through another line).
Notice that the Pope is not kneeling before a picture because he’s holding Jesus’ foot in his hand.
How could Pope Alexander VI be kneeling before the Christ Child when there could be no pope before Jesus was old enough to create the Catholic church?
Alexander VI has suffered in historical memory also because he was a Spaniard in the midst of Italians, and because of Anglo fear and loathing of all things Spanish, going back to the reformation.