My main concern is how idiomatic English relates to idiomatic Polish here. A frequency search on the web shows, in English, that forms of "to feel anger" are much less frequent than forms of "to feel angry". This matches my intuition that "to feel anger" draws attention to anger as an entity (and for that reason sounds more literary/philosophical when not immediately qualified in some way), whereas the more common "to feel angry" focuses on communicating a person's emotional state. Polish seems to exhibit the reverse trend in a frequency search, which suggests that the "right" translation of the idea should use a different grammatical structure.
Reflexive verbs never take direct objects (nouns). They can be followed by an (1) adverb:
- Czuję się źle - I feel bad (literally: badly)
or a (2) conjunction:
- Czuję się jakbym nie spał od dwóch dni - I feel as if I hadn't slept for two days
The non-reflexive verb czuć can be both (1) transitive (requiring a direct object):
- Czuję złość - I (can) feel anger
or (2) intransitive (e.g. followed by a conjunction):
- Czuję, że jesteś zdenerwowany - I can feel that you are nervous.
"I no longer feel (any) anger" is fine, but I find the use of "do" very strange here.
It is true that we can add "do" to an affirmative sentence to make it more emphatic, eg. "But I do love you", but we don't usually do it with a negative sentence.
There are a few examples of "do no longer live" (19) on the web, but they far outnumbered by those without "do" (188 checked). It could of course be a regionalism or dialect thing I don't know about. But it hardly registers at Ngram's collection of books.