As you probably I know, I try and keep an eye on the comments over at the blog called 'Pray Tell' where liberalism, modernism and many other isms abound in all shapes and forms. In a reply in one of the comboxes on the blog Fr. Ruff shares his thoughts on apostolic succession. He sees it as being "historically problematic" and "ambiguous." What a surprise. How he gets away with statements like this is beyond me. But remember, he doesn't think that the Bible contains the actual words of Jesus either. So I doubt he cares that Trent told us that apostolic succession is not only a historical reality, but that anyone who questions its reality is a heretic.
Trent Concerning Holy Orders
CANON II.--If any one saith, that order, or sacred ordination, is not truly and properly a sacrament instituted by Christ the Lord; or, that it is a kind of human figment devised by men unskilled in ecclesiastical matters; or, that it is only a kind of rite for choosing ministers of the word of God and of the sacraments; let him be anathema.
The words of Father Ruff.
But “sacramental priesthood in the apostolic succession, as understood by the Catholic (and Orthodox) churches” is quite a bit more complicated, historically problematic, ambiguous, and open to further doctrinal development than you seem to have any inkling of.