No. The Catholic Church can never be in schism for the Church cannot be in schism to herself. Someone can be in schism in regard to the Church, however.
At the moment the Catholic faith is run by a dedicated progressive marxist pope. Progressive Marxists are progressive marxists uber-alles. It matter not about one’s faith, even IF you are POPE. You are a marxist progressive regardless of your faith. My absolutely wonderful Polish girlfriend was overwhelmed by this new pope carrying his own bags, as were many. I said nothing other than “we’ll see.” She is coming around to the FACT that this pope is a Marxist uber-alles progressive. I am honestly surprised he has not some out in support of open homosexuality and demands the Catholic Church starts funding abortion.
Benedict is still Pope.
This is why Bergoglio has none of the protections of the Holy Spirit, and why he veers from one horrific error to another. It's because he's not the Pope.
But why isn't Bergoglio the Pope?
Benedict apparently resigned in February 2013, declaring that he would resign in such as a way as to leave the seat vacant. How could he still be Pope?
Here's how:
Canon 188 states:
A (Papal) resignation made out of grave fear that is inflicted unjustly or out of malice, substantial error, or simony is invalid by the law itself.
The criterion of Canon 188 that most clearly invalidates Benedict’s attempted resignation is the criterion of 'substantial error'.
The substantial error is the concept of an Emeritus or 'Shadow Pope' - one who has the title of Pope. That is the modern usage of Emeritus - 'one who retains the title'.
This is error. The Papacy was instituted by Christ. It is one and indivisible, and no mortal man has power to amend it; nor to smudge or elide it with taxonomy.
There cannot be two men sharing the position of Pope, any more than there can be two men who are Christ.
If Benedict believes himself to - in any sense - be Pope then he is still Pope. Because if he believes that he can retain any part of the Papacy - such as the title - then he is in substantial error about the nature of the Papacy, and his abdication was illegitimate.
Question: when he abdicated, Benedict declared that he would abdicate in such a way that would 'leave the seat vacant'. Surely this means that he is not still the Pope?
Answer: the fact that Canon 188 exists indicates that a Pope may still be Pope even if he publicly declares otherwise.
The office of Pope is not only one and indivisible, but has a divine character hedged about with the magisterium of the Body of Christ. It is not under the entire control of its current holder. Canon 188 embodies the Church's discernment of this fact.
There are other signs - apart from being called 'Pope Emeritus' - that Benedict is in substantial error about the nature of the papacy:
* He is still called "Benedict".
* He is still called "Your Holiness"
* He still wears a white cassock.
* When a Pope leaves office his gold ring - known as the Fisherman’s ring - is smashed with a specially designed silver hammer. This is because objects strictly tied to the ministry of St Peter must be destroyed - to avoid any confusion.
* But Benedict XVI’s ring has not been destroyed. The insignia on Benedict XVI’s ring has merely been scratched with a cross so that it can be kept ‘for posterity’.
If the Papacy was some mundane position like professor or judge, then these would be laughable superficialities.
But because these facts indicate that Benedict believes himself to share or retain the Papal ministry in some way, they indicate substantial error. And therefore that his abdication is void, and that he is still Pope.
There's more. This is a quote from Pope Benedict’s personal secretary, Archbishop Georg Ganswein. I include it because the Archbishop is well placed to know the mind of Pope Benedict.
From the election of his successor, Pope Francis—on 13 March 2013—there are not then two Popes, but de facto an enlarged ministry with an active and a contemplative member. For this reason, Benedict has not renounced either his name or his white cassock. For this reason, the correct title with which we must refer to him is still “Holiness.” Furthermore, he has not retired to an isolated monastery, but [has retired] within the Vatican, as if he had simply stepped aside to make space for his Successor, and for a new stage in the history of the Papacy, which he, with that step, has enriched with the centrality of [prayer] and of compassion placed in the Vatican Gardens.
The Archbishop has done us all a great favor in documenting this confusion.
If more clarity were needed, here is a forthright quote from Pope John Paul II.
"A Pope Emeritus is impossible"
I hope that this proves helpful. To non-catholics these arguments might seem legalistic and pointless. But Christ's Church discerns marriages as existing or not existing; or the presence/non-presence of the Blessed Sacrament by similar determinations.
Please of your charity pray for Pope Benedict XVI: that he might realise his error and rectify the situation in whatever way seems good to God.
-----------------------
Hat tip to Anne Barnhardt, who saw this so much earlier than anyone else.
http://www.barnhardt.biz/2017/01/16/cutting-the-crap-31-questions-and-blunt-answers-about-the-catholic-church-and-antipope-bergoglio/
-----------------------
Some FReepers have posted indications that Benedict may have been forced to abdicate by the Obama White House.
If these rumors turn out to be true, then it may be that Benedict was not only in 'substantial error', but also 'grave fear' when he abdicated. This would bolster the argument that Benedict is still Pope. However I just don't know enough about Obama's putative coup upon the Catholic church to make the case for this.
-----------------------
Note that Ganswein's quote was made at a time when Benedict was still living in the Vatican. Benedict is apparently now living at the monastery of Mater Ecclesiae.