Dawn sent me this link

http://www.traditioninaction.org/Questions/B295_FeeneyNewman.html

I had forgotten that Card Newman was a converso. The question seems to be-- was he a marrano?

I have not studied Card Newman apart from an occaisional encounter with him while reading other historians. He did oppose Infallibility but submitted as others also. Fr Feeney does not exactly say that Newman was a mason and I don't think he was.  If someone can show me a condemnation of him by some Church authority I will of course listen. The name is most familiar to me because of the Newman press. I have 7 or 8 books pub by them and was most impressed.

I have run into a quote somewhere of St Pius saying that Card Newman has been wrongly doubted and I am sure he knows better than moi. I will post the source if I can think of it. I do have a few disagreements with Fr Feeney.

Ex-- he laments the fact that between Pius V and X there were no saintly Popes. He forgets that  the time period 1534-1914 is not marred by one anti-pope or even one bad Pope. This is the longest in Church history and is something to celebrate imo.

Acc to Fr Radecki, there is at least one anti-pope in every century beg w/ the 3rd- 15th. With the except of the 13th as he does not see Boniface as an anti-pope. There are of course a few bad Popes( 8 imo. 2 Medici's in 16th cent) but I cannot find the first one until 1033 with Ben IX.