To answer the question...

Epieikeia is a virtue also called "equity".

The author of any human law cannot possibly take into account all contingencies and extraordinary circuмstances that may arise, and therefore only intends for his law to hold for what he obviously intends and no more. Law is made for man, not man for the law. So, epieikeia discerns that when an unusual circuмstance arises a person can discern the letter of the law is broken, but not broken in spirit and has no qualms about it. Canon law is to a great extent human law. Some are divine laws, and much is a mixture of divine and human in various degrees.

The definition of epieikeia according to Attwater's, A Catholic Dictionary, (1943): "Equity: the interpretation of a law whereby it is held not to bind in a particular case because some special hardship would result. Such interpretation can never be applied to divine law, whether positive or natural, and for the common good it is not permitted in respect of some ecclesiastical laws, e.g., those regarding the binding power of diriment impediments to matrimony."

413. In its use epieikeia is at once lawful and dangerous.

(a) It is lawful, for it defends the common good, the judgment of conscience, the rights of individuals from subjection to a written docuмent, and from oppression by the abuse of power;

(b) it is dangerous, for it rests on the judgment of the individual, which is prone to decide in his own favor to the detriment of the common good as well as of self.

415. The dangers of epieikeia also place limitations on its use.

(a) There is the danger that one may be wrong in judging that the lawgiver did not wish to include a case under his law. If this is not certain, one should investigate to the best of one's ability, and have recourse, if possible, to the legislator or his representative for a declaration or dispensation. It is never lawful to use epieikeia without reasonable certainty that the legislator would not wish the law to apply here and now.

(b) There is the danger that one may be in bad faith in deciding that the common good or justice requires the use of epieikeia; the motive in reality may be self-interest or escape from obligation. Hence, a person should not use epieikeia except in necessity, when he is thrown on his own resources and must decide for himself; and, even then, he must be sure that he acts from sincerity'and disinterestedness.

What is the dogmatic teaching on epiekeia? Has any pope specifically addressed this concept?

Reason I ask, is that I really believe one of the only remaining catholic bishops in the world who have not drifted into hersey is Bishop Neal Webster. He is a thuc sede bishop against NFP and BOD.

The only problem I could see with him is that he might be "in communion" with other objectively heretical groups like the CMRI and SSPX (who believe Jєωs, hindus, buddhists etc. can be saved) which would make him in communion with heretics. That would make him off limits as well because of communico in sacris.

That means there are no true catholic clergy anywhere which really scares me because then I am a dogmatic home aloner and I don't know if thats right. I have wondered about this concept epiekeia?