Can anyone post sources and texts in reference to the doctrine stating that jurisdiction is a constitutive element of apostolic succession?  Or that without jurisdiction, the claims of apostolic succession are rendered void?  Or anything to that effect.  This is primarily in reference to eastern schismatics who are alleged to possess true apostolic succession.  SJB, I seem to recall you had quoted a source for that.  

Dictionary of Dogmatic Theology, transl. Doronzo, (Bruce, 1952)

hierarchy (Gr. xxxxxxx — sacred authority). The body of persons participating in ecclesiastical power, which is divided into power of orders and power of jurisdiction.

The power of orders is immediately directed to the sanctification of souls through the offering of the sacrifice of the Mass and the administration of the sacraments. The power of jurisdiction, on the other hand, is immediately directed to ruling the faithful with reference to the attainment of life eternal, and is actuated through the authoritative teaching of revealed truths (sacred magisterium) and through the promulgation of laws (legislative power), together with the authoritative decision of legal actions involving its subjects (judicial power), and the application of penal sanctions against transgressors of the law (coactive or coercive power). These last three powers are functions of the same sacred jurisdictional authority with which the Church is endowed as a perfect society.

The power of jurisdiction is divided into: (1) power of forum externum, when directed principally to the common good, in so far as it regulates the social relations of the members and produces public juridical effects; and power of forum internum, when directed principally to private good, in so far as it regulates the relations of consciences with God and is exercised per se secretly and with prevalently moral effects; (2) ordinary power, when ipso jure (by law) it is connected with an office, and delegated power, when it is granted to a person by commission or delegation. Ordinary power is further divided into proper, i.e., annexed to an office and exercised in one’s own name (nomine proprio), and vicarious, i.e., annexed to an office but exercised in another’s name.

Since sacred power is twofold, hierarchy is likewise twofold, and therefore we have in the Church the hierarchy of orders, constituted by the body of persons having the power of orders in its different grades (see orders, holy), and the hierarchy of jurisdiction, consisting in the series of those persons who have the power of teaching and governing.

In both hierarchies there are grades, i.e., the fundamental grades, which have their source in divine right (episcopate, priesthood, and diaconate in the hierarchy of orders; papacy and episcopate in the hierarchy of jurisdiction) and the secondary grades, which have been instituted by the Church.

The two hierarchies, although very closely related, are really distinct. They are distinct in their mode of origin (orders are conferred by the appropriate sacrament, while jurisdiction originates through canonical mission) and in their properties (the valid use of orders, in most cases, cannot be prevented, while jurisdiction is revocable). They are, however, mutually related, because jurisdiction supposes orders and, vice versa, the exercise of orders is moderated by jurisdiction; and also because both come from God and directly or indirectly lead to God.

Those members of the Church who belong to the twofold hierarchy are called clerics (Gr. xxxxxxx – lot, portion, sort, i.e., in sortem Domini vocati — “called to the lot of the Lord”), while all the others are called laics, laymen, laity (Gr. Xxxxxxx – the people). Since in its bosom the Church carries superiors and subjects, really distinct by divine right, it is an unequal society, i.e., a society in which the members do not have equal rights and duties.

The following is an exact reproduction of Q and A, taken from "The Church of Christ is Apostolical," Rev. James J. McGovern, DD., The Manual of the Holy Catholic Church, Chicago, 1906., pgs 157-158. Imprimatur Aug 24, 1906, Most Reverend James Edward Quigley, Archbishop of Chicago.

Q. How does it appear that the Church of Christ is Apostolical?
A. By the word Apostolical is meant, that the Church of Christ is ruled by the apostles, and the doctrine of faith was taught by them as they received it from Christ, the powers of priesthood were exercised by them, and that she must continue to the end of the world in the profession of the same faith and doctrine, and in a continual uninterrupted succession of priesthood, so that the apostolic doctrine, priesthood, and mission remain with her forever. That the Church shall always preserve the apostolical doctrine, we have seen above, when explaining the rule of faith; and that she shall never want a succession of true pastors, inheriting the same priestly powers and mission which she received at first from the apostles, is manifest from these considerations: First, Because true pastors, properly empowered, and lawfully sent, are a necessary part of the Church, and instituted by Jesus Christ, “for the perfecting the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edification of the body of Christ,” Eph. iv.; consequently, such pastors will never be wanting in her, according to that of the prophet: “Upon thy walls, O Jerusalem, I have appointed watchmen; all the day and al the night they shall never hold their peace,” Is. 1xii. 6.

Second, because the scripture assures us, that “no man taketh the honour of the priesthood upon himself, but he that is called by God, as Aaron was,” Heb. v. 4.; much less can any man possess the powers of the priesthood, unless they be given to him by those who have the power to give them. Thus St. Paul writes to Titus, “For this cause I left thee at Crete, that thou shouldst set in order the things that are wanting, and shouldst ordain priests in every city, as I also appointed thee,” Tit. i, 5.

Third, that none who have these priestly powers can lawfully exercise them, unless they be authorized and commissioned to do so by being lawfully sent. Thus the apostles received their mission from Christ, who said to them, “As my Father sent me I also send you,” Jo. xx. In like manner they send others to succeed themselves, with power also to send others after them, as St. Paul and Barnabus were sent by the chief pastors of the Church at Antioch, and their doing so was declared to be the work of the Holy Ghost, “Then, they, fasting and praying, and imposing their hands upon them, sent them away. So they being sent by the Holy Ghost, went to Selucia,” Acts xiii. 3.

St. Paul himself sent Titus, as above, that is, authorized and commissioned him to govern the Church in Crete, and ordain pastors in it under him; and he says, in another place, “How can they preach unless the be sent?” Rom. x. 15. This, then, is the door by which the true pastors of Christ’s flock enter, to wit, when lawfully ordained and sent, or commissioned by chief pastors of the Church. For all who take that office upon themselves, without entering by the door are declared by Christ himself to be “thieves and robbers,” John x. 1. From all which it is manifest, that as true pastors are an essential part of the Church of Christ, and will never be wanting in her, therefore, there will be in the Church a continued uninterrupted succession, of the priestly powers and mission given at the beginning by Jesus Christ himself to his apostles, to the end of time.

This is primarily in reference to eastern schismatics who are alleged to possess true apostolic succession.

"Or that without jurisdiction, the claims of apostolic succession are rendered void?  Or anything to that effect."

That being sent by a Pope is necessary for apostolic succession has never been conclusively proven, sorry, Quigley doesn't quite cut it.    

“ …this power of giving jurisdiction as a consequence of a new practice established now for several centuries and confirmed by general councils and even by concordats, has returned to its point of origin and does not belong in any way to metropolitans, but resides solely in the Apostolic See. So today the Pope as a duty of his office appoints bishops for each of the churches, and no lawful consecration may take place in the entire Catholic Church without the order of the Apostolic See.” (Trent, session 24, chap. 1, de Reformat.) (Pope Pius VI, apostolic letter Caritas, 13th April 1791)

“…the power of jurisdiction, which is conferred upon the Supreme Pontiff directly by divine rights, flows to the Bishops by the same right, but only through the Successor of St. Peter...” Pius XII, Ad Sinarum gentem, 7 October 1954)

SJB quoth:

Quote

“ …this power of giving jurisdiction as a consequence of a new practice established now for several centuries and confirmed by general councils and even by concordats, has returned to its point of origin and does not belong in any way to metropolitans, but resides solely in the Apostolic See. So today the Pope as a duty of his office appoints bishops for each of the churches, and no lawful consecration may take place in the entire Catholic Church without the order of the Apostolic See.” (Trent, session 24, chap. 1, de Reformat.) (Pope Pius VI, apostolic letter Caritas, 13th April 1791)

That's disciplinary and talking about normal times.  Surely you can see that.  Same with the Pius XII quote, which I have heard in this context about a gazillion times.  

You also leave out the context of the first quote.  This encyclical from Pius VI is asserting the rights of the Church against the French revolutionaries who wanted to make the bishops subject to them, or to choose their own bishops.

Very interesting that a sedevacantist has a quiverful of quotes that all seem to cast major doubt on the sedevacantist thesis, some being very obscure, and trots out these quotes without showing the other side of the story and with no context.  Interesting that this same sedevacantist also says he "hates" what he calls "dogmatic sedevacantists," and rarely points out the flaws in SSPX theology, but spends far more time railing against these dogmatic sedes, whatever they are.  I draw no conclusions, I just point a few things out.

Anyway, as Caminus helpfully insinuates, if the Eastern schismatics i.e. Orthodox have apostolic succession, then you don't need to be sent by a Pope to have apostolic succession.  So do the Eastern schismatics have apostolic succession?  That is the first question to be answered.

SJB, it bothers me greatly that you exhibit your quotes as if they refute what I'm saying, when as you must know full well, they do nothing of the kind.

In both hierarchies there are grades, i.e., the fundamental grades, which have their source in divine right (episcopate, priesthood, and diaconate in the hierarchy of orders; papacy and episcopate in the hierarchy of jurisdiction) and the secondary grades, which have been instituted by the Church.

The two hierarchies, although very closely related, are really distinct. They are distinct in their mode of origin (orders are conferred by the appropriate sacrament, while jurisdiction originates through canonical mission) and in their properties (the valid use of orders, in most cases, cannot be prevented, while jurisdiction is revocable). They are, however, mutually related, because jurisdiction supposes orders and, vice versa, the exercise of orders is moderated by jurisdiction; and also because both come from God and directly or indirectly lead to God.