Often "traditionalists" are painted as being divisive, schismatic, "of irregular status," and so forth. I find this curious on all counts. Let's consider:
Divisive? First some groups deviate from the faith. Traditionalists react, first with words, then with actions. What is the response to the traditionalist counter? Hatred. Harsh polemics (guised in self-righteous talk about love and unity). Even murder. Hey, if they won't agree with you, bump them off: that's been the solution in more than one situation. The traditionalists therefore have no problem drawing more defined lines, even as others obviously have no problems trying to simultaneously 1) erase the lines pretending that there are no problems, and 2) oppress the traditionalists as divisive and unloving.
Schismatic? Obviously those who deviate from the faith are schismatic, not those who resist the innovations. The crazy thing is that people attack traditionalists for "breaking communion over small things". Huh? That's exactly what schism is! Breaking communion over a small, but fixable thing, before it turns into a much larger problem. The point of schism is to cut off a sick member so that they can realise that they are sick and come to a cure. Traditionalists are not schismatics, they are the ones who are trying to bring the schismatics (who happen to be a majority in some areas of the world) back into the Church!
"Of irregular status"? First, where did this term originate, I wonder. Sounds very... well... Ecumenical movement like to me. Sort of like "Canonical Orthodox Churches". ROCOR obviously has a unique status, as does many of the other groups in existence. What people don't realise is that ROCOR, Cyprian, etc. don't claim to be a new Church, they only say that they are the free or healthy part of their Church, while much of their Church is sick or in schism or somehow otherwise unorthodox. What I find particularly strange is when certain members of world Orthodox jurisdictions in the US, who had ROCOR bishops help consecrate their bishops and give them there beginning in America, say that ROCOR is uncanonical. Talk about cutting the legs out from under your own feet! The whole OCA situation is even stranger. They're granted autocephalous status by an uncanonical, soviet-created Church (a "status" which the strangely-praised Ecumenical Patriarchate still does not recognize to this day), and within decades have the arrogance to sound a note of offense when someone talks about an Orthodox Church in America that isn't centered and with its foundation in the OCA.
All of America is of irregular status, as Fr. Schmemann wrote long ago. Shortly before the OCA was granted autocephaly he showed exactly how irregular by doing complete 180's in some of his ecclesiological positions. And this is the man who many now look to as a leader and possible saint? Eek.