Actually it is the other position, that of Matthias being an Apostle that derails the idea of Apostolic Succession. For if Matthias is an Apostle then Judas had to be an Apostle. For Judas’s successor can’t succeed to something that Judas wasn’t. So you have one Apostle following another. So the question then becomes what Apostle succeeded Peter??? And the answer is NONE. No Apostle succeeded Peter and the protestants have a real good argument that Apostolic Succession came to a grinding halt when the last Apostle died. Remember that in scripture the only succession mentioned is that of Judas/Matthias. Peter’s successor was a bishop but is never mentioned in scripture. So if the scripture sets the precedent that one Apostle is succeeded by another Apostle and no Apostle succeeded Peter then Apostolic Succession stops. BUT if Judas’ successor was a bishop then Apostolic Succession through the line of bishops, which is what the church teaches, is scripturally based and the protestants have no leg to stand on.
