Right, but it's not that the priest doesn't have the power of Orders necessary to confirm.
.
Highly controversial, as will be rendered clear after just thirty seconds of looking at the sources posted.
One could argue in this Crisis situation that God would supply the necessary permission.
.
Argue it then, don't just claim it.
.
I believe there were some independent Traditional priests before the SSPX bishops were around who administered Confirmation based on the notion of supplied jurisdiction.
.
Not an argument, since even if true they 1) may have done so validly under the indult of
Spiritus Sanctus Murena and/or 2) they may have done so invalidly.
.
I think you have it backwards in terms of power of Orders. If priests lacked the power of Orders to confect the Sacrament, no amount of permission from the Pope could "activate" something that does not exist. It's like with Confession. Priest have the power of Orders to hear Confessions but absent jursidiction, they are ORDINARILY unable to validly absolve someone from their sins. Of course the Church supplies in many different scenarios, and I believe that those same scenarios would apply to Confirmation as well.
.
Literally every theologian I have ever found on this topic says it is a matter of order, not jurisdiction.
Read what I sent you, I'm not making this up:
http://thetradforum.com/index.php?topic=152.0.
As I said, I conducted this research when Bishop Williamson tried to delegate priests to confirm in Austraulia. I sent my findings to Fr. Chazal who agreed (that priests in his situation
cannot confirm validly) and said that he
found the same thing when he went to the theology manuals too.
.