So EMJ:

(1) believes all the V2 and post-V2 claimants are true Popes,

(2) his "true" Pope Ratzinger explicitly stated that the SSPX is not in schism, but

(3) EMJ insists the SSPX is in schism, as he raged in your linked video.



I cannot take him seriously on this topic.

Yeah, he's ridiculous where it comes to the state of the Church.  He should realize how the Jews engineered the infiltration of the Church and the replacement of true popes with either Jєωιѕн and/or Jєωιѕн-controlled puppets.

John Paul made Bergolio a cardinal.  Are the images of Ratzinger giving devil hand gestures authentic or photo shopped?

If the Sspx joined with the Vatican Ii hierarchy, then they just might be in schism.  Vatican II lacks the four marks of the Church.  Vatican II promotes a false gospel of Jesus.  The synod is not Catholic   all. If you look at the Methodist and Baptist conferences and Catholic synod, they all have much in common which is a push for sodomy and women pastors.  There is no talk about turning to Jesus by repenting of sins. 

The main issue with his argument is that he thinks schism is a greater sin than heresy {perhaps ∵ schism is against "the unity of ecclesiastical charity" (II-II q. 39 a. 1 ad 3), heresy against faith, and charity > faith (1 Cor. 13:13}. However (II-II q. 39 a. 2 co.):

unbelief [heresy] is a sin committed against God Himself, according as He is Himself the First Truth, on which faith is founded; whereas schism is opposed to ecclesiastical unity, which is a participated good, and a lesser good than God Himself. Wherefore it is manifest that the sin of unbelief [heresy] is generically more grievous than the sin of schism