Problem Myrna, is that the Sovereign Pontiff, not you, decides who is (and is not) in communion with Catholic Church. I know that you are a sede, and that's fine, but as a sede, you have no authority, no judge, no final arbiter of what is true and what is not, what is to be at least tolerated and what is to be condemned, and what is to be taught. You act like Father Feeney was condemned; he wasn't. He was disobedient, like you, in that he refused to accept what he felt was an unlawful command (his summons to Rome, which, in my opinion, he should have obeyed), but unlike you, he accepted the final authority of the Roman Pontiff to bind the universal Church on matters pertaining to the Deposit of Faith, the Revelation of the Triune God to man. You have no authority, and hence, you have no Church, no Magisterium which can settle any of your disputes, whatever they may be. All that you can appeal to are legitimate Catholic theologians, who have long since died, none of whom ever attached a de fide note to the idea that any Catholic must believe that there are souls in Paradise, since the Day of Pentecost, who lack the character of sacramental Baptism.
As with Peter Abelard's rejection of the torments of eternal Hell for infants who died without sacramental Baptism, which went against 600 years of undisputed teaching of that of Saint Augustine in the theological schools of the West, so, too, Father Feeney paved some new ground, in recognizing the Sovereignty of the One and Triune God in bringing Baptism to each and every one of His Elect, if such, indeed, is God's will. No Pope since Father Feeney's time has ever condemned him for what he wrote, including, Pope Pius XII, and all of his successors. If they have not condemned him, why you? Or, anyone else, for that matter?
But, then again, you have no Magisterium, do you? And, likely, no Holy Orders and no Eucharist, either.