Being completely honest, I always defined R&R mentally as “Recognize” the govt office but “Resist” that which I’m not bound to follow.
.
Sedeprivationism basically says the same thing, just explains it in formal theological terms. “Recognize” the material/govt office but “Resist” the spiritual office. And one would resist for 2 reasons 1) the V2 popes’ spiritual authority is impaired because they are heretics, 2) even if they had spiritual authority, they don’t impose any V2 error on any catholic to believe or accept.
.
That’s why R&R always made sense to me, because my interpretation of it was in sedeprivationist terms, even long before I had ever heard the sedeprivationist term. I don’t doubt that many others think the same.
.
But, to be fair to Fr Cekada, the sspx never explained R&R that way, which is problematic, and I believe their wishy-washy theology on this (their failure to call the V2 popes heretics and the failure to say that their spiritual office is impaired) has led to their current situation. Their lack of fortitude on this (as well as failure to condemn the new mass clearly) is a sign of lukewarmness towards error. And so, this lack of clarity is rightly corrected by Fr Cekada and others. ...What a mess!