Bible Verses and Early Church Commentary | Historical Christian Faith

[AD 420] Jerome on Esther 1:1

The Book of Esther stands corrupted by various translators. Which (book) I, lifting up from the archives of the Hebrews, have translated more accurately word for word. The common edition drags the book by knotted ropes of words hither and yon, adding to it things which may have been said or heard at any time. This is as is usual with instruction by schools, when a subject has been taken up, to figure out from the words which someone could have used, which one either suffered injury, or which one caused injury (to the text).
And you, O Paula and Eustochium, since you have both studied to enter the libraries of the Hebrews and also have approved of the battles of the interpreters, holding the Hebrew Book of Esther, look through each word of our translation, so you may be able to understand me also to augmented nothing by adding, but rather with faithful witness to have translated, just as it is found in the Hebrew, the Hebrew history into the Latin language. We are not affected by the praises of men, nor are we afraid of (their) slanders. For to be pleasing to God we do not inwardly fear those caring for the minas of men, "for God has scattered the bones of those desiring to be pleasing to men" (Ps 52.6), and according to the Apostle, those like this are "not able to be servants of Christ" (Gal 1.10).

[AD 856] Rabanus Maurus on Esther 1:1-2

The story of Esther is found not only in the holy books but also in the Antiquities of Josephus, though their accounts of these events differ in certain respects. But the latter also raises the question of just who was this Ahasuerus who ruled from India to Ethiopia, over one hundred and twenty-seven provinces; for when Josephus mentions him, he reports that Cyrus was the son of King Xerxes who ruled in Persia after his uncle Darius. He says, therefore, that Cyrus was the one the Greeks called Artaxerxes—surnamed “Longhand”—who held the kingdom for forty years; but I don’t believe that Esther lived in that era because Ezra would never have kept silent about her, given that he writes that it was at that time that Ezra and Menna returned from Babylon, and then narrates their subsequent actions. Eusebius, accordingly, suggests in his Chronicle that this Ahasuerus was called Artaxerxes, and that he reigned for forty years after his uncle Darius, who was surnamed “Bastard.”

Source: Commentary on Esther

[AD 856] Rabanus Maurus on Esther 1:1

Not only the Holy Scriptures, but the Jewish Antiquities of Josephus as well contain the story of Esther, although they differ in some of the historical details. Therefore, there is some question as to the actual identity of that Ahasuerus who ruled from India to Ethiopia over one hundred twenty-seven provinces. In fact, when Josephus mentions him, he relates that he was Cyrus son of King Xerxes who reigned over Persia after his father Darius. He also adds that this Cyrus was called Artaxerxes by the Greeks, having the nickname “Long-handed,” and was in power for forty years. But I do not think that Esther lived at that time. Ezra writes that he had returned at that time from Babylonia, but he would never have omitted mentioning Esther if she had actually accomplished the things which are attributed to her. Therefore Eusebius, in his Chronicles, thinks that this Ahasuerus was called Artaxerxes and reigned after Darius for forty years, having the nickname Nothus as his father had.

Source: EXPLANATION ON THE BOOK OF ESTHER 1

[AD 1781] Richard Challoner on Esther 1:1

This Book takes its name from queen Esther, whose history is here recorded. The general opinion of almost all commentators on the Holy Scriptures makes Mardochai the writer of it: which also may be collected below from chap. 9 ver. 20.

[AD 856] Rabanus Maurus on Esther 1:2

Susa is the capital of Persia, which according to the chroniclers was founded by the brother of Memnon; and it is called Susa because it borders on the river Susa, which is the location of the royal palace of Cyrus. This was known for its bright and colorful stone, along with its gold columns, its ponds, and its gems; and it also contained a likeness of the heavens inlaid with shining stars, and other things that the human mind finds difficult to comprehend. And it was there, we are told, that the king in question would stage for his subject peoples a grand feast that featured impressive accouterments and a wealth of riches.

Source: Commentary on Esther

[AD 856] Rabanus Maurus on Esther 1:2

Susa is the metropolis of Persia which the historians say was founded by the brother of Memnon. It is called Susa because it lies along the river Susis where the royal palace of Cyrus was constructed with glittering white stone as well as other varieties. It is conspicuous for its golden columns and roofs and for its precious stones. It also contains the sculpture of a sky full of shining stars and other incredible things to the human mind. This is the place where it is said that the king gave a lavish banquet and displayed his great wealth to his subjects.

Source: EXPLANATION ON THE BOOK OF ESTHER 1

[AD 856] Rabanus Maurus on Esther 1:3-8

Though these preparations for so rich a feast seem intended to portray in concrete terms the parade of wealth and the abundance of delights possessed by a powerful king, it is actually a very sanctified allegory which symbolizes the magnitude of spiritual riches, and the excellence of the necessities of life, provided by the most powerful of kings, namely the Lord Christ, which he—in accord with his method of dispensation—has generously distributed to each of his faithful ones. For this king of great wealth, who was convinced by the entreaties of his faithful wife to do away with the imminent destruction of the Jews which wicked men were plotting, prefigures no one more than our Redeemer who is accosted every day by the prayers of the Church who is his dearest wife, and frees his chosen ones from the hands of their enemies, and subjects their adversaries to the punishment they deserve. And that Esther prefigures the Church, no one can doubt; nor may she be described as the bride of anyone but Christ. That is why no one should reject this interpretation merely because this actual king was faithless, as though this would mean he could never be a figure of the just king; for we do not say that anyone’s treacheries or transgressions are the sum of his behavior, whether he is trustworthy or even faithless: “He did not sin, and no deceit was found in his mouth” (1 Peter 2). “For how can light associate with darkness; or what can Christ have in common with Belial (2 Corinthians 6)?” Rather, the good actions and just judgments of any individual should be associated with no less an authority than the one from whom comes every good, about whom it is written: “He will judge the world in fairness, and the peoples in his truth” (Psalm 9). For the transgressions and sins of the faithful do not provide the most accurate representation of their character, as do the errors and wicked actions of the gentiles; and the reason we are saying this is because certain of our teachers have used David’s behavior toward Uriah and his wife as a prefiguration of Christ and the Church. Why would anyone want to suggest that Moses’ doubts at the “waters of dissension,” Aaron’s deception about manufacturing the calf, Solomon’s lust, Ezekiel’s arrogance, Peter’s denial, and Saul’s blasphemy are fitting prefigurations of our Redeemer? And yet no one can properly deny that the good actions and the correct doctrines of those men offered a great deal of evidence on his behalf. No one, therefore, ought to take us to task for comparing, by some sort of analogy, the righteous works and the just judgments of a great king to the king and judge of all the ages; since whatever is good belongs to him, and every sin flees his presence. But if anyone should feel that what we are saying is inappropriate, let him read the prophet Isaiah who compared Cyrus, the king of Persia and a gentile, to our Redeemer when he said in the person of the Lord: “I will give you hidden treasures and the secrets of hidden things so that you may know that I am the Lord, since I the God of Israel call on your name for the sake of my servant Jacob, and Israel my chosen one; and I have summoned you in your name, I have made you like me though you have not acknowledged me. I am the Lord and there is none greater; aside from me there is no God. I have strengthened you, though you have not acknowledged me” (Isaiah 45). Let him read as well the short works of the Fathers, who said that the deeds—or rather, the misdeeds—of the shameful kings Saul and Jeconiah were symbolic prefigurations of the holy actions of our Redeemer—that is, they interpret the death of Saul, who was anointed king but was quite rightly killed for his crimes, in reference to the death of Christ the innocent king; and they explain the fact that Jeconiah was exiled from Judah to Babylonia—which he deserved because of his sins—as a prefiguration of the grace of that same Redeemer of ours, which was why he deigned to wander through the world for sake of saving the nations once he had left the Jews behind for their faithlessness. They also reported that the actions of Pharaoh or Nebuchadnezzar should be understood as prefigurations of the enemies of the Church; for example: Pharaoh commands the male infants of the people of God to be killed in the river and the females spared, because the Devil wishes to extinguish the sturdy aspects of our behavior, and to nourish the feckless and weak ones. In the same way, Nebuchadnezzar ordered all the peoples subject to him to bow down and worship his statue to the sounds of orchestras and musicians; and the Devil uses the sweetness of earthly pomp to try and steer the human race away from proper intent, and to pervert the hearts of the deceived into indulging their desire, which is “the worship of images.” If, therefore, certain actions—namely the just punishment of shameful men—prefigured not only wicked acts but good ones, could not the good actions or words of good men, which are contained in the writings of the prophets, also have prefigured the good deeds of those who came after them? After all, the power of the sacred narrative is (as someone has said) that it tells us about what happened at o time or another so that it may spell out what is going to come; it approves of the actor so that it may reprove him in the guise of an allegory, and condemns what has happened to persuade us allegorically of what is going to happen. Let us also consider the short works of St. Augustine, who said that the seven husbands of a single wife who died without children, with whom the Sadducees were testing the Lord because they denied the idea of resurrection, were likewise a sure prefiguration of the sacrament of the Church. In fact, he taught that the wife, and her barrenness and death, as well as the deaths of her husbands, prefigured noteworthy events even though the Lord himself did not tell this story, and neither did any of the evangelists who were writing in his person; instead they recorded the unspeakable words that wicked men had thrown in the Lord’s face, on account of the Lord’s very sanctified response. So when the faithful reader finds these sentiments and others like them among the statements of the sacred Fathers, he should not give the credit to us if we choose to include assertions of a similar character in our own brief works.

Source: Commentary on Esther

[AD 856] Rabanus Maurus on Esther 1:3-8

“So in the third year of his rule, King Ahasuerus held a grand feast for all his officials and young men, the famous heroes of Persia and Media, and the chiefs of the provinces in his presence, so that he could show off the wealth of the glory of his kingdom.” For our Redeemer—whom Ahasuerus represented in both his title and his rank—is interpreted as “my entry” or “my court”, because in the third era of that age the eternal ruler of man in the Father and the Holy Spirit opened wide to the human race the sacrament of his incarnation; and he has opened up for us the entryway to life and served to his faithful ones the most ample of spiritual banquets. The first era, then, was before the Law, the second was under the Law, and the third was under grace, namely when he fulfilled his preaching in the Gospels and prepared for all the nations an opulent meal of his body and blood. That is to say, the Lord himself was spiritually commending to us, in as a mystery, the excellence of this feast through the Gospel parable in which he described the king who threw a wedding for his son, and the great meal prepared by a man. “So the great king held a feast for seven days, in the entryway of the garden and the grove that the king had planted and cultivated by hand,” because for the entire period of that life which transpires in multiples of the number seven, our Redeemer satisfies his chosen ones with the pasturage of the divine word and the feasts of the virtues, in the Church of this world where each of the faithful readies himself— with correct faith and good works—to enter Paradise and the celestial kingdom. Hence they will become accustomed in every respect to the delights and the pleasures of the heavenly kingdom where fruit-bearing trees are planted, that is, where holy men and those who are famous for their good deeds show—through the divine gift that has been lavished on them—the beauty of holy conduct and proper doctrine. Hanging there “from every spot are tents the color of the sky, and fine linen and blue,” because it is there that the spiritual ornament of study, and the splendor of celestial wisdom, flash with the brilliance of the virtues whose proper purpose is to instruct us in those things. For that matter, the color of linen mimics (as some claim) the appearance of gold, and has deservedly been compared to the sheen of divine wisdom which excels above all in the cultivation and the practice of righteousness. “And these tents were stretched with ropes of flax and purple, and were supported by marble columns.” For flax signifies the mortification of the flesh, purple the blood of martyrdom, ivory the chastity of the body, and marble columns the solidity of the sacred teachers. It therefore makes sense that, as we are told, the tents of various colors were held up with ropes of flax and purple by ivory circles on marble columns, because the beauty of the holy Church ought to shine in the contemplation of wisdom—or rather in the perfection of the virtues—through the restraint and chastity of bodies, i.e. with the honor of martyrdom among the teachers of the sacred Gospels; and it ought, through both the word and the example of these men, to reach the notice of many people so that those who have been taught, encouraged and comforted by them may be able to reach, as they should, the court of the celestial empire. There were also “gold and silver couches spread about a floor inlaid with emerald and Parian marble, which he decorated with a marvelous variety of pictures,” because the humility of the saints, which is decorated with diverse kinds of the various virtues, provides the peace of inner contemplation to the chosen of God when they consider the divine word and investigate the true wisdom. It is there that the sweetness of knowing and loving God is lavished generously upon those who seek righteously in the gift of the Holy Spirit. It is about this couch that the bride speaks in the Song of Songs: “Our couch is bright with flowers;” in other words, when any of the saints make use of the tranquility of his times and depart from times of tribulation, it is then above all that they are free to make use of the sacred couches, fasting, prayer and all the other fruits of the spirit. They may then raise themselves up high in the contemplation of ethereal matters to gaze in all directions upon the glory of the divine majesty, since they have been given a respite from less essential concerns. The emerald is, after all, so called because it is so green; and Parian is the whitest kind of marble; and it is fitting that, as we are told, the floor where the couches were placed was set with these two stones, since it is through the whiteness, i.e. the chastity of the body, and the greenness of the good sense which is always verdant in the grace of God, that the foundations of humility are solidly laid where the reward of eternal peace is prepared for all those who deserve it. Hence it is written: “Blessed are the poor in spirit, because theirs is the kingdom of Heaven” (Matthew 5). And “He who has well humbled himself will be properly raised up” (Matthew 23). That is why the same Truth says to the disciples elsewhere in the Gospels: “Learn from me because I am gentle and humble of heart, and you will find rest for your souls; for my yoke is smooth, and my burden is light” (Matthew 11). “And those who were invited to the royal feast drank from golden goblets.” Those who drink from golden goblets are those who draw divine wisdom from the precious sayings of the sacred Gospels; and those who are served foods in different kinds of vessels are those who—by reading the Law and the prophets, and the apostles and the Gospels—are known to accept the manifold meals of spiritual doctrine on which are fed the souls brought up for eternal life. And as befits the magnificence of a king, wine is also served to the guests in exceptional abundance, since the gift of celestial grace is generously granted to each and every one of the faithful in accordance with the dispensation of divine mercy and the grant of the Holy Spirit. This is because, in Paul’s judgment: “the charity of God is spread throughout our hearts by the Holy Spirit which was given to us (Romans 5)”; and “To each one is given a manifestation of the Spirit for their use. Indeed, one person is able through the Spirit to speak the words of wisdom, while another, through the same Spirit, speaks the words of knowledge; to another is given faith in that same Spirit; to another, the grace of healing in that one Spirit; to another, the working of miracles; to another, prophecy; to another, the power to discern spirits; to another, the varieties of languages; to another, the interpretation of speech” (1 Corinthians 12). And what we said a moment ago—i.e. that he did not force to drink anyone who did not wish to do so, but as the king had decreed he sat each of his officials at tables so that each could take whatever he liked—symbolizes the freedom of grace in which no one is forced against his will to accept a spiritual gift, rather the willing participation of each individual is sought in accordance with that statement of the Lord where he says: “Whoever can accept this, let him accept it” (Matthew 19). And in the same spirit: “If you wish to enter into life, then keep the commandments” (ibid.). And again: “If you wish to be perfect, go, sell everything you have and give it to the poor, and you will have treasure in Heaven; and come, follow me” (ibid.). For at the festive and sacred feast of the holy Church, our king seats his teachers at the table of the Holy Scriptures so that they might dispense to each of the faithful the doctrines that are suited to him, and adapt to each man’s character the preaching of the word so that each one might take from it whatever he perceives as feasible and useful to him. Of course, the words of a teacher must be crafted with such skill that even though the faults of his hearers differ from one another, they should be suited to each individual and yet not contradict themselves; in this way he may maneuver in a single pass between the moderate passions, while at the same time cutting out—in the manner of a double-edged sword—the tumors of carnal thoughts. He may, accordingly, preach humility to the arrogant without making the timid more afraid; he may lavish authority upon the timid without loosening up on the arrogant; he may preach to the indolent and the sluggish attention to good works, without giving the impulsive the license to act without restraint; he may place limits upon the impulsive without making the indolent secure in their laziness; he may dampen the wrath of the impatient without encouraging carelessness among the easygoing and the gentle; he may enflame the feckless to take action without adding fuel to the irritable; he may fill the miserly with the desire to give generously, without having to preach tightfistedness to the prodigal; he may praise marriage to the promiscuous, without enticing the continent back to excess; he may praise bodily virginity to the continent, without causing married couples to look down on the fruitfulness of the flesh. He will preach the good in such a way that the bad will not also be commanded alongside it; he will praise the highest good without despising the final one; he will foster the final one so that for as long as it is believed sufficient, no one will ever turn from it toward the highest. So the faithful and wise slave who has been appointed the manager by his master, and gives his fellow slaves their share of the wheat on time, is praised by his master’s words; and he is promised that he will be put in charge of all his goods. Hence it is necessary that one who ministers with the cup of the word should possess the means of discretion, so that he may obtain from his ministry praise and reward rather than condemnation and torment.

Source: Commentary on Esther

[AD 856] Rabanus Maurus on Esther 1:3-8

Even though from the historical point of view it simply appears to show the abundance of riches and the luxury of delights of a powerful king, … according to the holier mystery of our most powerful king, namely, Our Lord Christ, this preparation of a most magnificent banquet signifies the greatness of the spiritual riches and the excellence of the living treasures that he distributes according to the measure of his dispensation to each of his faithful.

Source: EXPLANATION ON THE BOOK OF ESTHER 1

[AD 856] Rabanus Maurus on Esther 1:9

“Vashti the queen also held a feast for the women in the palace where King Ahasuerus liked to stay.” Queen Vashti must symbolize the Jewish people, which at the time seemed to have ruled like a queen since it was found to stand apart from all the other nations in its worship of a single God. So she held a feast for the women where the king would liked to stay; that is, in Jerusalem itself—the site of the Temple of God and the Holy of Holies—it demonstrated its observance of the Law in worship or rather by meditating on the Holy Scriptures, through which it supplied to its members the refreshment of spiritual knowledge by granting them the awareness of their power from Heaven.

Source: Commentary on Esther

[AD 856] Rabanus Maurus on Esther 1:9

The person of Queen Vashti provides a clear expression of the Jewish people who themselves appeared to reign as queen when they were found to prevail over all the other nations in the worship of the one God. Therefore when she gave a banquet for the women where the king used to linger, this symbolized the Jewish people who demonstrated their observance of the law in the worship they performed in Jerusalem where the temple and the Holy of Holies used to be.

Source: EXPLANATION ON THE BOOK OF ESTHER 2

[AD 856] Rabanus Maurus on Esther 1:10-12

“So on the seventh day when the king was very festive, and after he had drunk too much and grown heated from the wine, he ordered Mehuman, and Biztha, and Harbona, and Bigtha, and Abigtha, and Zethar, and Carcas, the seven eunuchs who ministered in his presence, to bring in Queen Vashti before the king once the diadem had been placed upon her head, so that he could show off her beauty to all the peoples and officials; for she was very beautiful. But she refused, and disdained to come at the king’s command.” The seventh day of the feast symbolizes the beauty of the time when the Lord incarnate clarified in his abundant grace all the mysteries of the Law and the prophets upon which the pious minds of devout men had been feeding till then. It is about this completion that Paul writes to the Galatians when he says: “And when the time was completed, God sent his own son made from a woman so that he might redeem those who were under the Law, so that we might receive the adoption given to children. Because you are the children of God, God has sent the spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying: ‘Abba! Father (Galatians 4)!’” And it is well said that after drinking too much he had grown heated from the wine, because he poured into his disciples, through the arrival of the Paraclete, abundant grace through the gift of the Holy Spirit. We read about this wine in the Acts of the Apostles that when, in the Cenacle of Zion, the Holy Spirit settled upon one hundred and twenty believers and the Jews thought that they were full of new wine, Peter answered them with: “Brothers, despite what you think these men are sober, since it is the third hour of the day. But this is what was spoken through the prophet Joel: ‘And it will be in the last days, says the Lord, that I will pour out from my Spirit upon all flesh, and your sons and your daughters will prophesy; and your young men will see visions, and your old men will dream dreams. And I will indeed pour out from my spirit in those days upon my servants and my maids, and they will prophesy; and I will show marvels in the heavens above, and signs on the earth below (Acts 2).’” When, during the allegorical wedding in the Gospel, the chief steward tastes the sweetness of the wine, he says to the groom: “Every man serves the good wine first, and once they have become drunk he serves the inferior stuff. But you have saved the good wine till now.” So the king in his happiness ordered the seven eunuchs who ministered in his presence to bring in Queen Vashti before the king once the diadem had been placed upon her head, so that he could show off her beauty to all the peoples. And in the same way, our Redeemer Christ (i.e. the Lord) directed the order of the aforementioned saints, which was full of the grace of the sevenfold Holy Spirit, to assemble the Jewish people at a spiritual feast, so that its beauty and nobility— which it had as a privilege of its ancestors, and because of its knowledge of the Law and the prophets and its cultivation of righteousness (for which it was better known than the other nations before the coming of the Lord)—would be known to the peoples of the entire world. But she disdained to come, not only showing her contempt for the emissaries but even rejecting the authority of the supreme king. Of course, the Lord himself referred to this in the Gospel parables, when he explained that it was the mercy of the righteous father toward his wasteful but penitent son, whom he took into his home, that led him to sacrifice a calf and hold a feast which his older son refused to attend even though his father had summoned him from town. And elsewhere we read about the men who—occupied with their pursuit of other things—did not want to come to the wedding which the king had prepared for his son, or to the great meal which, it is written, a certain man had prepared and to which he had invited many people. It was, we are told, because of this that the head of the household—who had every right to feel indignant—turned away even men of the highest rank and substituted others in their place. Hence the older son, and the ancient people of the Synagogue who are represented in the person of Queen Vashti, refused to leave their dwelling, i.e. to be parted from the letter of the Law, but were rather content to live by their own judgment which they would exercise for the satisfaction of their earthly desires. They were exiled far from the homeland of the Holy Spirit and the counsel of the Father, forever brittle and hard, full of rancor and indignation; they are the one who says: “I have bought a field, and I need to go out and see it; I ask you to excuse me” (Luke 14). The one who purchases five yoke of oxen is weighed down by the burden of the Law while enjoying the pleasures of our earthly senses; the one who has gotten married and cannot come to the wedding, and having been made flesh can never be one with the spirit—the character of this man is much like that of the workers in the parable in which they are sent to the vineyard at the first, the third, the sixth, and the ninth hour, i.e. they were hired at different times. So they are indignant that the workers hired at the eleventh hour are being paid the same amount as they are.

Source: Commentary on Esther

[AD 856] Rabanus Maurus on Esther 1:10-12

The seventh day of the banquet signifies the beauty of the time in which the incarnate Lord manifested with more abundant grace all the mysteries of the law and the prophets on which the pious minds of the faithful had until then pastured. And writing about that fullness to the Galatians, the apostle Paul says, “But when the fullness of time had come, God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under the law, in order to redeem those who were under the law, so that we might receive adoption as children. And because you are children, God has sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, crying, ‘Abba Father.’ ”

Source: EXPLANATION ON THE BOOK OF ESTHER 2

[AD 856] Rabanus Maurus on Esther 1:12-19

But let us hear what Scripture has to say about the stubbornness of Vashti, that most foolish of queens: “So the king was angered, and enflamed by his excessive rage he questioned his wise men, who were always at his side according to royal custom; and he used to do whatever they advised him, since they knew the laws and the rules of the ancestors. And in the first and second place were Carshena, Shethar, Admatha, Tarshish, Meres, Marsena, and Memucan, the seven leaders of Persia and Media who would see his face and whose authority was normally second only to his own; and it was to their judgment that Queen Vashti was subject when she did not want to obey the command of King Ahasuerus given to her through the eunuchs. And as the king and his officials listened to him, Memucan said: ‘Vashti has injured not only the king, but all the officials and peoples who are in all the provinces of King Ahasuerus. For her words will go out to all the women, so that they will despise their husbands and say: “King Ahasuerus ordered Queen Vashti to come to him, and she did not want to.” And with this example, all the wives of the officials of Persia and Media will hold cheap the authority of their husbands; so that the king’s indignation is just. And if it pleases you, let an edict go forth from your face, and let it be written according to the law of Persia and Media— which it is forbidden to ignore—that Vashti may no longer come into the king’s presence, but that her reign should be given to another who is better than her.’” Now, when Vashti shows her arrogance, King Ahasuerus seeks the advice of the seven wise men who are always at his side according to royal custom, and commands that their judgment about her should be carried out; and this can only mean that our Savior— through his learned men who are filled with the grace of the Holy Spirit, and always take care to stand in his presence with upright faith and good works—bases his verdict upon the stubbornness of the Jewish people who are guilty of punishing and condemning him. He ruled, in other words, that they should be driven from the seat of the king, i.e. from their relationship with God for which they were ordained and chosen; and that another, better people—namely, the Church of the nations—should take its place in genuine faith and full devotion. So the Lord promised by the Law and the prophets shows in the Gospel itself that he was destined, at the behest of the Father, to summon Judea when he says: “I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel (Matthew 15)”; and likewise: “It is not good to take the bread of children and toss it to the dogs” (ibid.). But when the gentile woman continues to petition him, the Lord himself rightly praises her great faith; and elsewhere the faith of the centurion is shown preference over the faith of the Jews, when he says: “Amen, I tell you, many will come from the East and the West and will recline with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in the kingdom of Heaven; while the children of this kingdom will be cast into the outer darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth” (Matthew 8). Likewise, in another passage the Truth herself says to Jerusalem: “Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you kill your prophets and you stone those who were sent to you; how often have I wanted to gather your children, like the hen gathers her chicks beneath her wings, but you did not want me to. See, your house will be left to you desolate” (Luke 13). Moreover, after his resurrection he commanded his disciples as follows about summoning the nations: “Go and teach all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to keep everything I have ordered you to do. And see, I myself am with you for all the days until the very end of the age” (Matthew 28). It is also fitting that he was publishing his decision about Vashti through Memucan, who is mentioned last in the series of seven wise men, because he symbolizes the persona of the apostle Paul who was the last to be called as an apostle, and through whom the Jews are properly reproached for their faithlessness. For he says about himself: “But I am the least of the apostles” (1 Corinthians 15).And elsewhere he says: “To me, the least among the saints, has been given this grace, so that I might evangelize Christ among the nations” (2 Corinthians 3). So while he had been preaching the word of God together with Barnabas in the Synagogue of the Jews, and the Jews—who were full of zeal— were speaking out blasphemously against what Paul was saying, he said to them firmly: “It was proper that the word of God should first be spoken to you; but since you reject it, and judge yourselves undeserving of eternal life, see we are turning to the nations. For so the Lord has commanded us: ‘I placed you as a light for the nations, so that you may bring salvation to the ends of the earth.’ And hearing this, the nations rejoiced, and they glorified the word of the Lord, and whoever had been preordained for eternal life believed” (Acts 13).

Source: Commentary on Esther

[AD 856] Rabanus Maurus on Esther 1:13-22

The advice which King Ahasuerus asks of his seven sages who were, according to royal custom always by his side, concerning the insolent Vashti—as well as the sentence he orders them to pass concerning her—undoubtedly signifies the sentence our Savior passes against the arrogance of the Jewish people. He passes this sentence through his teachers who are always in his presence and full of the grace of the Holy Spirit in their orthodox faith and good works. The Jewish people themselves who incurred this judgment bear the responsibility for the punishment and condemnation they have received of being expelled from the royal bridal room, that is, from the congregation of God for which they had been ordained and elected, so that another, better bride, namely, the church of the nations, may take their place with sincere faith and full devotion.

Source: EXPLANATION ON THE BOOK OF ESTHER 2