The validity of confirmation does not depend on jurisdiction.  The special powers that the pope has sometimes granted to priests, empowering them to confirm, is not of the power of jurisdiction, but is in relation to the power of order.  It is an activation of a latent power priests possess by virtue of their power of orders.  Without this "activation", priests can not validly confirm.  This is not a question of supplied jurisdiction, and it would seem that any attempted confirmation by a traditional priest these days would be doubtful, at best.


The Sacraments: A Dogmatic Treatise.  1917.
Joseph Pohle, Ph.D., D.D.
Pp. 310-313:

"In extraordinary cases simple priests can administer Confirmation, but only with special powers granted by the Pope.  This Proposition may be technically qualified as "sententia certa."

Proof.  Hugh of St. Victor, Durandus, and other Scholastic theologians deny the right of the Supreme Pontiff to grant the special power referred to; but there is now no longer any reason to doubt it.  Thomists, Scotists, Bellarmine, Suarez and De Lugo, all regard Confirmation administered by simple priests with papal authority as valid.  Our thesis cannot be demonstrated directly from Sacred Scripture and we therefore have to rely on Tradition... [here follows a proof from the Eastern Tradition]...

b) In the Latin Church Confirmation, as a rule, has always been administered by bishops, and only in exceptional cases by priests.

This practice, which is far more in conformity with the dogmatic teaching defined at Trent, gained the upper hand in the West after the thirteenth century, when Baptism and Confirmation gradually became separated by constantly lengthening intervals of time.  The administration of Confirmation by priests was and is comparatively rare, but cases have occurred in every century since the time of Gregory the Great, though always with express papal authorization and with chrism consecrated by bishops.  Since he Council of Trent the Holy see has at various times granted the right to administer Confirmation to Jesuit missionaries, to the Custodian of the Holy Sepulchre at Jerusalem, the Provost of St. Hedwig's Church in Berlin and other priests.

c) It is not easy to justify this exceptional practice in view of the fact that the validity of Confirmation has nothing to do with the power of jurisdiction, but depends entirely on the character of ordination.

A deacon, for instance, could not validly administer this sacrament even with papal permission, whilst, on the other hand, a heretical, schismatic, suspended or excommunicated bishop can do so even against the express command of the Pope.  How, then, is it possible for a simple priest to confirm validly, if the papal permit does not supply the lack of episcopal consecration?

Various attempts have been made to overcome this difficulty.

Some theologians have assumed that the papal delegation is not a mere extrinsic permission but implies an intrinsic perfectioning of the character of ordination by which the delegated priest receives the episcopal character.  Others hold with Suarez that the papal authorization merely gives to the delegated priest a higher extrinsic dignity which, together with his sacerdotal character, suffices to enable him to administer the Sacrament validly.  Both hypotheses are unsatisfactory.  A simpler and more effective solution is that devised by Gregory of Valentia.  It was the will of Christ, he says, that both bishops and priests should be empowered to administer Confirmation, the former as ordinary ministers of the sacrament by virtue of the episcopal consecration the latter as its extraordinary ministers by virtue of the priesthood, leaving it to the pope to determine the manner of exercising this latent power."