This conclusion has significant implications for the theory of Apostolic Succession. Essentially, it means that we're not talking about some mechanical Bishop-to-Bishop, hand-to-head passing on of power, but a stream of continuity within the Council of Presbyters and overseen and administered by the Episcopal office within the Presbyterate. There has been an unending continuity of ministry within the Presbyterial ranks of the Church from the days of the Apostles until now. So, even if a literal line of Bishop-to-Bishop consecrations cannot be absolutely maintained all the way back to the Apostles, we can maintain a continuity of Apostolic ministry at the Presbyterial level from the days of the Apostles to the present.
You can still disagree with this author, but even if you prove that Titus never existed it doesn't disprove the author's point that "there has been an unending continuity of ministry within the Presbyterial ranks of the Church from the days of the Apostles until now".
What is it with this focus on some “Presbyterial ranks”? It’s nonsense and has nothing to do with what Jesus taught. It doesn’t take some “Presbyterial ranks” to understand what Jesus and the apostles taught was needed for salvation. Those “Presbyterial ranks” have led more people astray then anything else. The gospel is preached by individuals and the focus on “Presbyterial ranks” is NOT what is taught in scripture.