yet I would argue that the new apostles are a combination of the

priestly class of the old testament

as well as

the prophets of the old testament.

The prophets unlike the priestly class has never been limited to women, and there are numerous female prophets through the old testament. Remember the priestly class wasn't the only faction of the OT that was arguing what was the true meaning of god's word, there was also the prophet faction, as well as the king of Israel and Judea.

When Jesus came to this world, supposedly all this went out the window, there was one word, and he combine all three roles the priest (remember his original garments were one of a priest preparing a sacrifice when he died), prophet (he was not of the Sanhedrin he was an outsider), and king (line of david). He was all of them, three aspects, separate yet together. Yet when Jesus came he fulfilled all three roles, yet his rules were rules not of this world but rules for the next world instead of forming ritualistic laws of moses. Jesus didn't really care the about the actual letter of tradition but instead about the importance of the why of tradition, getting back to the source of a relationship with god and your fellow man.

Of course this all went through the window when Constantine made Catholicism an organized religion.

------------------------

So in sum, in my opinion it is tradition and not holy tradition. I don't recognize your divine origin you supposedly see.