So, are you then saying that the ancestors of the current OCA and Carpatho-Russian Orthodox diocese were right to break communion with Rome because the Latin bishops of the time were trying to abolish an orthodox rite of the Church within North America?
It would not justify schisming from ecclesiastical communion with the Bishop of Rome and the Catholic and Apostolic Church and Faith, but it surely would have justified going on with their Eastern ecclesiastical traditions and ignoring the Latin bishops.
I know that probably sounds trite, I don't mean it to. But from reading some of your other posts, I never would have thought you would say that preservation of a venerable tradition justifies schism.
No, No. It does not justify real formal and evil schism for unjust reasons. A certain material
separation, absolutely. If one were to have a heterodox priest as one's parish priest, you would be justified in not going to that priest ever again (if his superiors aren't doing anything about it) and going to another priest who is orthodox. Someone else's heterodoxy and/or schism doesn't justify you going heterodox and/or into schism.