is the genealogy led. But since Melchizedek was a type of the Lord, and carried the image of Christ, just as Jonah did, therefore Scripture says he was "without father and without genealogy," so that we might gaze upon Christ in him as in an image. The Melchizedekians also object to us: "Why," they say, "does the Father say to him, 'You are a priest forever, according to the order of Melchizedek' (Ps. 109:4)?" To whom we respond, that this Melchizedek was a just man, and truly bore the image of Christ. Moved therefore by the prophetic spirit, perceiving the offering to be brought forth for the Gentiles, he honored God with bread and wine, imitating Him who was to come, Christ. Since, therefore, the synagogue of the Jews was offering sacrifice to God according to the order of Aaron, not bread and wine, but calves and lambs, and was glorifying God with bloody sacrifices, God cries out and says to Jesus Christ, the Son of God, who was to be born of the Virgin Mary: "You are a priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek; not according to the order of Aaron," who worshiped with calves and lambs; "but, You are a priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek," bringing forever the offering of those who bring it, with bread and wine. Through whom to the Father be glory with the most holy Spirit, now and always, and to the ages of ages. Amen. For I have one year remaining upon having stepped into your city, B litanies, with one day having passed in between, let such people, therefore, be cast out,
AD MONITION TO THE FOLLOWING HOMILY
A such men; but that it may be proven that he said these things from his heart and sincerely, a few words being interjected, he speaks thus: But if you have been terrified while hearing this sentence (for I see everyone groaning and pricked in heart), let them repent, and the sentence is released, B *let them be cast out* (μεταβαλλέσθωσαν, καὶ λύεται τὰ τῆς ἀποφάσεως). These words seem to put forward the sentence as truly pronounced. But I think these things were said by the prelate only in the spirit of threatening, and he would not have wished anyone to undergo excommunication unless they had fallen into the same sin again, those who had run to the spectacles.
Another thing is proposed to be explored, namely, on what day Chrysostom gave this sermon: for the matter does not seem to be without difficulty. For in this sermon he says, "three days ago [there was] a heavy rain" (πρὸ τριῶν ἡμερῶν ἐπομβρία). Now that rain fell on Wednesday of Holy Week, and on Thursday, the Supper of the Lord, nothing is remembered to have happened; on Good Friday, equestrian games turned many away, [and on] Saturday the same people went to the theatrical spectacles. From hence it seems to follow that this Homily was given on holy Easter day itself; counting back between that day and the Wednesday preceding, three days intervene, full and complete—Thursday, Good Friday, and Holy Saturday. But if the sermon was given on Easter, why is there not even a word about the resurrection of the Lord in the whole homily? For even if it could perhaps be said that Chrysostom gave an address to vent his indignation upon those who went to the theaters on holy days, and thought of nothing else, was it proper on the holy day of Easter to have nothing at all about such a great celebration, not even to speak of it briefly? But if we move the Homily to the following day, another difficulty arises: for not only three days, but four full and complete days intervene; but perhaps Chrysostom said "three days" without counting, which in his case is not unusual. As for the matter, otherwise, we leave it in doubt, not being of such great moment.
D This difficulty can be easily resolved, provided it be held as certain that this homily was delivered on the day of Pascha. For just as Chrysostom the presbyter often gave a sermon with the bishop and others on the same day and continuously in church, a fact which appears from his sermons: so he could have given an address after the bishop or another, whether presbyter or another, on the day of Pascha, and he himself have argued gravely against spectacles and theaters. I have on this matter the agreement of Montfaucon. See Vol. V, p. 118, n.b. Add to these the Preface of Fr. Matthaei to the book inscribed: *J. Chrysostomi Homilia IV*, Vol. 2, p. 77, Misen, 1792. To these add Montf. Pref. of this volume, § 11, the same volume, p. 321.