“To show continuity from the geographical Israel to the Catholic Church, the true Israel.”
So the Catholic Church is the True Israel? Well, maybe...Israel certainly had apostasy and punishment!
“The issue here is St. Clement’s reliance on the Old Testament to draw the link to the priesthood to Aaron.”
I’m sure I’ll annoy both Orthodox and Catholic by pointing out the New Testament knows nothing of the office of priest. Deacons? Yes, and the qualifications for deacon were listed. Elders? Yes, and likewise the qualifications were given.
Priests? Nope. The Priesthood of Aaron was to offer sacrifices for the forgiveness of sin. Hebrews - and yes, it was disputed for some time - says:
“For since the law has but a shadow of the good things to come instead of the true form of these realities, it can never, by the same sacrifices that are continually offered every year, make perfect those who draw near. Otherwise, would they not have ceased to be offered, since the worshipers, having once been cleansed, would no longer have any consciousness of sins? But in these sacrifices there is a reminder of sins every year. For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins...
...When he said above, “You have neither desired nor taken pleasure in sacrifices and offerings and burnt offerings and sin offerings” (these are offered according to the law), then he added, “Behold, I have come to do your will.” He does away with the first in order to establish the second. And by that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.
And every priest stands daily at his service, offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. But when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God, waiting from that time until his enemies should be made a footstool for his feet. For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified.
And the Holy Spirit also bears witness to us; for after saying, “This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, declares the Lord:
I will put my laws on their hearts, and write them on their minds,” then he adds,
“I will remember their sins and their lawless deeds no more.”
Where there is forgiveness of these, there is no longer any offering for sin.”
Not only does the writer of Hebrews not JOIN us to the priesthood of Aaron, but he CONTRASTS how inferior was Aaron’s priesthood to that of Jesus.
In fact, “He does away with the first in order to establish the second.”
So...can someone tell me how a Bishop of Rome can legitimately link the Church to Aaron’s Priesthood?
To paraphrase the marriage ceremony, ‘What God has parted, let no man put together’!
The Church is the True Israel, yes.
Protestant translations routinely mistranslate the Bible as pertains to the office of priests and bishops.
Both “presbyteros”, priest and “episcopos”, bishop occur in the New Testament in numerous places.
But more important is the question not of terminology but of function. The foundational verse for Christian priesthood is “This is my body, which is given for you. Do this for a commemoration of me” (Luke 22:19). Neither “priest” or “bishop” is used, but what we have here is Christ taking on the role of the priest giving the Eucharist and immediately commanding those present do it likewise. This establishes Christian ministerial priesthood: men consecrated to offer the sacrifice of Christ to their flock.
It is true that the office of bishop (that is, a priest capable of ordaining other priests) was not fully distinct from the office of priest because in most churches, given the small numbers of the faithful, the bishop was able to offer the Eucharist without delegating it to a priest, with the help only of deacons.
It is also true that the Christian priesthood is not a mere continuation of Old Testament priesthood, for obvious reasons. It is a full-scale replacement.