Those who are called to be priests are already filled with the Holy Spirit; otherwise they wouldn't be called. Christ Himself called on the 12 and made them His priests. One of them was the devil. So, even now, some priests are not priests.
The NT is clear that in the Church some are apostles, some teachers, prophets, and not everyone is an apostle, teach and prophet. Not all of us are "royal priesthood" of believers. Most of us are hopeful (and even hopeless) followers.
St. Justin Martyr speaks of the "president" of the congregation who leads the Sunday liturgy as early as 145 AD. And St. Ignatius (c. 105 AD) says that "where there is a bishop, there is the catholic [universal] Church." And he was a disciple of the living Apostles. Apostle John (towards the end oft he 1st century) calls himself a presbyter/elder, so disciples are his successors.
St. Paul speaks of bishops (episkpoi) in Phil 1:1 (probably somewhere between 50 and 60 AD). Obviously, the Apostles had to ordain the first bishops, and they in turn had to ordain others. The faith is from God, handed down to the Apostles, and from them to bishops and priests to administer and lead. It's where the Church gets its authority.
Those who deny Apostolic succession deny the Apostlic authority. Yet the same deniers accept Apostolic testimony as inspired and "authoritative," but no their commission. One can only speculate why, but envy and jealousy comes to mind.
This is silly.
The Apostles go into great detail about the qualities that individuals should exhibit to be selected by their congregations to be pastors. The decision making in the early church was done by the congregation, or by groups selected by the congregation. The autocratic hierarchy only emerged after the end of the Apostolic era. BTW, it is only after the emergence of this hierarchal system that doctrines are accepted that place the church between man and GOD.