We declare, moreover, that, whether one considers its existence or its constitution, the Church of Christ is an everlasting and indefectible society, and that, after it, no more complete nor more perfect economy of salvation is to be hoped for in this world. For, to the very end of the world the pilgrims of this earth are to be saved through Christ. Consequently, his Church, the only society of salvation, will last until the end of the world ever unchangeable and unchanged in its constitution. Therefore, although the Church is growing—and We wish that it may always grow in faith and charity for the upbuilding of Christ's body—although it evolves in a variety of ways according to the changing times and circuмstances in which it is constantly displaying activity, nevertheless, it remains unchangeable in itself and in the constitution it received from Christ. Therefore, Christ's Church can never lose its properties and its qualities, its sacred teaching authority, priestly office, and governing body, so that through his visible body, Christ may always be the way, the truth, and the life for all men.


Jesuit Fathers of St. Mary's College. The Church Teaches: Docuмents of the Church in English Translation . TAN Books. Kindle Edition.

Ordinarily, also, the teaching power (magisterium) is connected with the power of jurisdiction. It is possible, of course, to distinguish in the Church a threefold power: the potestas magisterii , or the right to teach in matters of faith and morals ; the potestas ministerii , or the right to administer the sacraments, and the potestas regiminis , or the power of jurisdiction . Christ, however, did not establish a special hierarchy for the "potestas magisterii", nor does the teaching power pertain to the power of order, as some have maintained, but rather to the power of jurisdiction.


https://www.catholic.org/encyclopedia/view.php?id=5760

It is usual to distinguish a twofold hierarchy in the Church, that of order and that of jurisdiction, corresponding to the twofold means of sanctification, grace, which comes to us principally through the sacraments, and good works, which are the fruit of grace. The hierarchy of order exercises its power over the Real Body of Christ in the Eucharist; that of jurisdiction over His Mystical Body, the Church (Catech. Conc. Trid., pt. II, c. vii, n. 6). Christ did not give to all the faithful power to administer His sacraments, except in the case of baptism and matrimony, or to offer public worship. This was reserved to those who, having received the sacrament of order, belong to the hierarchy of order. He entrusted the guidance of the faithful along the paths of duty and in the practice of good works to a religious authority, and for this purpose He established a hierarchy of jurisdiction. Moreover, He established His Church as a visible, external, and perfect society ; hence He conferred on its hierarchy the right to legislate for the good of that society. For this double purpose, the sanctification of souls and the good or welfare of religious society, the hierarchy of jurisdiction is endowed with the following rights :

the right to frame and sanction laws which it considers useful or necessary, i.e. legislative power;
the right to judge how the faithful observe these laws i.e. judicial power;
the right to enforce obedience, and to punish disobedience to its laws i.e. coercive power;
the right to make all due provision for the proper celebration of worship, i.e. administrative power.

Furthermore, with the power of jurisdiction there should be connected the right to exercise the power of order. The acts of the power of order are, it is true, always valid (except in the sacrament of Penance, which requires in addition a power of jurisdiction ). However, in a well-ordered society like the Church, the right to exercise the power of order could never be a mere matter of choice. For its legitimate exercise the Church requires either jurisdiction, or at least permission, even of a general character.


https://www.catholic.org/encyclopedia/view.php?id=5760

Among the prerogatives conferred on His Church by Christ is the gift of indefectibility. By this term is signified, not merely that the Church will persist to the end of time, but further, that it will preserve unimpaired its essential characteristics. The Church can never undergo any constitutional change which will make it, as a social organism, something different from what it was originally. It can never become corrupt in faith or in morals; nor can it ever lose the Apostolic hierarchy, or the sacraments through which Christ communicates grace to men. The gift of indefectibility is expressly promised to the Church by Christ, in the words in which He declares that the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. It is manifest that, could the storms which the Church encounters so shake it as to alter its essential characteristics and make it other than Christ intended it to be, the gates of hell, i.e. the powers of evil, would have prevailed. It is clear, too, that could the Church suffer substantial change, it would no longer be an instrument capable of accomplishing the work for which God called it in to being. He established it that it might be to all men the school of holiness. This it would cease to be if ever it could set up a false and corrupt moral standard. He established it to proclaim His revelation to the world, and charged it to warn all men that unless they accepted that message they must perish everlastingly. Could the Church, in defining the truths of revelation err in the smallest point, such a charge would be impossible. No body could enforce under such a penalty the acceptance of what might be erroneous. By the hierarchy and the sacraments, Christ, further, made the Church the depositary of the graces of the Passion. Were it to lose either of these, it could no longer dispense to men the treasures of grace.Promulgating invalid Sacraments would constitute a defection of the Church in the very essence of her mission.



https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03744a.htm

There is a simple way to show that sedevacantist bishops are not members of the Catholic hierarchy (of jurisdiction). Sedevacantist bishops do indeed have supplied power to forgive sins. But does anyone recognize the power to enact laws in a sedevacantist bishop? Authority is defined as 'the ability to pass a law'. Does your sedevacantist bishop enact laws in your church? Does your sedevacantist bishop have power over a particular territory? Does your sedevacantist bishop grant special indulgences? Does your sedevacantist bishop refers to his church as a cathedral? The answer to these questions is in the negative. If your sedevacantist bishop were in fact a member of the Catholic hierarchy (of jurisdiction), he would be able to demand obedience. His laws would bind in conscience. No sedevacantist bishop has such power.

.

This question and these ideas have received an increasing amount of attention in the sede world in the last couple of years, I'm not quite sure why. The more it's discussed, the more I incline to the idea that sede bishops and priests are the true hierarchy of the Church. That is the position that seems to have the least amount of problems; there is no angle on this that is without problems.

You are correct; by Fr. Desposito's criteria, one would have to conclude that the hierarchy no longer exists. But this is impossible.

If we are to read works like the one quoted by Cardinal Franzelin, he talks about the hierarchy being Catholic bishops who preach the Faith and rule the Church. (Ordinarily it includes a pope too, but we all agree that's not happening at the moment.) Well, who is doing that? Trad bishops, and no one else.

I think this is convincing. As far as the objections against it, Fr. Desposito says authority means having the power to enact law. Trad bishops certainly enforce Church laws on souls, as do trad priests. They require Catholics to believe in Catholic doctrine and practice the Faith, and even observe Church laws such as the six precepts of the Church.

The objection that they are unable to enact law seems a little weak, especially given that there is no other competing group of Catholic bishops who could be entertained as the hierarchy. Maybe this objection could be answered by saying trad bishops do in fact have the power to enact law, but incorrectly believe they don't. Or maybe they choose not to enact laws, despite having the power to do so, because they believe (and reasonably so) that it would be imprudent to claim jurisdiction in that sense over the faithful, but that doesn't in itself prove they don't have the power to do so.

We live in strange times, but it seems obvious to me that the Catholic Church is the group of people loosely referred to as traditional Catholics today.

Fr. Desposito wrote:



Defined by whom? Where? I thought the definition of authority was the power to punish those who disobey the law. And certainly there are people in every society who have the power to punish those who break the law without being able to change the law or make new laws. The police have authority, which means they can write tickets, for example, against people who break the law, but they don't have the power to make laws.

.

This question and these ideas have received an increasing amount of attention in the sede world in the last couple of years, I'm not quite sure why. The more it's discussed, the more I incline to the idea that sede bishops and priests are the true hierarchy of the Church. That is the position that seems to have the least amount of problems; there is no angle on this that is without problems.

You are correct; by Fr. Desposito's criteria, one would have to conclude that the hierarchy no longer exists. But this is impossible.

If we are to read works like the one quoted by Cardinal Franzelin, he talks about the hierarchy being Catholic bishops who preach the Faith and rule the Church. (Ordinarily it includes a pope too, but we all agree that's not happening at the moment.) Well, who is doing that? Trad bishops, and no one else.

I think this is convincing. As far as the objections against it, Fr. Desposito says authority means having the power to enact law. Trad bishops certainly enforce Church laws on souls, as do trad priests. They require Catholics to believe in Catholic doctrine and practice the Faith, and even observe Church laws such as the six precepts of the Church.

The objection that they are unable to enact law seems a little weak, especially given that there is no other competing group of Catholic bishops who could be entertained as the hierarchy. Maybe this objection could be answered by saying trad bishops do in fact have the power to enact law, but incorrectly believe they don't. Or maybe they choose not to enact laws, despite having the power to do so, because they believe (and reasonably so) that it would be imprudent to claim jurisdiction in that sense over the faithful, but that doesn't in itself prove they don't have the power to do so.

Or maybe the simple power of enforcing already-existing legislation, such as the six precepts of the Church, is in itself sufficient to prove they have jurisdiction, even if they don't have the power to enact new laws.

We live in strange times, but it seems obvious to me that the Catholic Church is the group of people loosely referred to as traditional Catholics today.

Yeti,

Your subjection to a Trad bishop is purely voluntary. The authority they have over you is given by you to them. A Catholic in any region where they operate can say, "no," I'm going to Bishop X down the road, or I prefer SSPV, or SSPX, or CMRI, or some independent chapel and priest. The rejected bishop has no power and authority which says, "here is the Church, and I am the local authority."

You chose to be subject to whomever you are subject to. That's not power of jurisdiction over you,  whether you like it or not.

What a wall of hogwash.