John Chrysostom : And he established this no longer from common custom only, but also from what happened under the old [Testament]: which especially influenced them. There was no one who died there: how then could that [Testament] be firm? In the same way (he says). How? For blood was there also, as there is blood here. And if it was not the blood of the Christ, do not be surprised; for it was a type. "Whereupon," he says, "neither was the first [Testament] dedicated without blood." What is "was dedicated"? was confirmed, was ratified. The word "whereupon" means "for this cause." It was needful that the symbol of the Testament should be also that of death. — Homily on Hebrews 16 Oecumenius : "even the first was not." And thus, he says, by death, the covenant is confirmed, for the first had the blood as a symbol of death; but the new has the actual death. As those were types, the truth is in the new. "not dedicated without blood." As if he were saying: The blood has not ceased or been interrupted for a short time, but immediately as the covenant was dedicated, it also had successive blood. — The Pseudo-Oecumenian Catena on Hebrews