In schism from what? The conciliar church? 

That's what schism means - a formal division between 2 groups or organizations.


Schism can be good or bad.  It depends on the situation.  

In the situation of Trads, they are in schism with new-rome, but NOT is schism with Truth, doctrine, orthodoxy.
In the situation of new-rome, they are in schism with Trads and also Truth, doctrine, orthodoxy.

Trads are morally free from guilt.  New-rome is not.  But both are in schism, per the legal definition of the word.

I usually sit on the sidelines watching the Sedevacantist debate with some amusement.  It is not an either/or situation.  It is true that Francis is either pope or he is not pope.  This is true.  But whether one can know positively that Francis is pope or not pope, this is not true.  No man in the world can know, positively, that Francis is pope.  Why cannot a man say, Francis may or may not be pope, who is to know given the current crisis? 

If the new rites of the priesthood and the bishopric are called into question - and any sane Catholic would call these into question - then we all must ask the questions:  Are these Cardinals priests?  Are they bishops?  If they are not, then what?  This whole attitude that one must be a sedevacantist, or that he must not, seems on the face of it to be imbalanced. 

I agree. I have very similar thoughts.

On the practical side of things though, we have to choose. I mean, where do you go to mass? Do you fast as people did in the 50s, or do you accept Paul VI's rules? Do you assist at Una cuм masses or not?

Why do we have to choose? Our business lies in avoiding sin and keeping the faith, not in deciding whether the pope is the pope or not. The pope has authority over us and are to obey him unless he wants us to do something that offends God. This is how true obedience to all authority works whether that authority is your general in the army,  drill sergeant, boss, parent or pope. Always has, always will.

Then you have already chosen R&R. No problem for me. May God bless you.

Do you fast as people did in the 50s, or do you accept Paul VI's rules? Do you assist at Una cuм masses or not?

No one is going to hell if they mix up the fasting rules.  Una cuм was made up by Fr Cekada.  These are all man-made divisions in Traditionalism; these divisions are not from God.

If we want to be technical, R&R is also schismatic.  They say new-Rome is in authority but then do their own thing.    

I find this a very poor argument but one the sedes fling towards non sedes all the time, it’s one of the main ones they use actually. 

If a would-be Pope teaches something erroneous or heretical, no matter how orthodox he might appear to be, you cannot follow his teaching, and you don’t have to justify rejecting the teaching by first reaching the conclusion that hey, he’s actually not a real Pope because what he’s doing is technically impossible, so the only conclusion is that he must be a fake Pope etc. etc. so then NOW I have full justification to legitimately reject him. 

It’s preposterous and flies in the face of history and common sense. 

The sedes who use this argument would have ignorant people who have no clue about the doctrine of the heretical Pope losing office etc. following error and heresy on the principle that “you have to obey the Pope if you think he’s the Pope no matter what.”