Do you believe Fr. Feeney erred in any way in his theology or canonical actions?
Yes or No?
When someone says "the errors of Feeney", they're going to mean firstly, his position on baptism of desire, and possibly as a secondary matter, anything he may have done or not done during the course of his particular debacle.
I don't find anything wrong with Fr. Feeney's position on baptism of desire, and clearly, the former Cardinal Ratzinger does not either. Fr. Feeney was reconciled to the Church without having to recant anything at all. As to how he reacted during the course of his suffering over this matter, I believe he may have made mistakes in regards to what he did or did not do. But I don't want to judge the man, or accuse him of anything without sufficient knowledge of all the details. That's not my job, and I've never considered it my job. I stick with the truth or falsity of a particular proposition.
Baptism of desire, Steven, is properly identified as a theologumena, or theological speculation, and not a dogma or even anything sub-dogma requiring belief in order for one to keep inviolate the Catholic Faith.
Cardinal Ratzinger, now the supreme pontiff, knows this.