The issue of ROCOR ever being in schism from anyone other than the Moscow Patriarchate on the canonical territory of the Moscow Patriarchate is an issue to discuss separately. Fr. John Krestiankin, a respected spiritual father of the MP, said in his letters written before the reconciliation that there was no schism except where ROCOR had parishes on the canonical territory of the MP. It is, rather, easier to prove that Archbishop Lazar Puhalo received consecration from bodies that were definitely in schism from the Orthodox Church. It could well be that, should he visit a ROCOR church, he would not be allowed to concelebrate, and ROCOR clergy would not be allowed to concelebrate with him. The OCA received him, rightly or wrongly, for purposes of its own economia and Puhalo's sake. Other churches are not obligated to view him the same way. Likewise, one does no need to officially be declared a heretic. If one professes heresy, fighting against the received belief of the Orthodox Church, one is a heretic. Now, for some people and beliefs, it may be a matter for investigation and discussion. We have to realize, however, our current poverty and disorder.
I will say, in addition, that, looking at Church history, the cause of correctness has not always prevailed. Many times, we have just had to move on. It is unfortunate that confusion exists, continues, and spreads, but eventually it will pass.
Post edited for the proper titles - Michał Kalina