Commentaria in III Regum
2. IN THE MONTH OF ETHANIM, ON THE FESTIVAL DAY, WHICH IS THE SEVENTH MONTH.—Some wrongly read “Bethanim.” We must read, with the Hebrew, the Septuagint and the Roman text, “Ethanim,” that is, “of the strong,” because in this seventh month the fruits are strong, that is, ripe, and are gathered in with the crops and stored in barns, by which the heart and life of man is confirmed and strengthened, says Vatablus; or on account of the frequent feasts which were celebrated in the seventh month, in which God was worshipped by strong and pious men: for feasts as it were strengthen men in piety and the worship of God, so Cajetan; or because in that month the strength and health of men is manifested, which is chiefly tried by the sicknesses of autumn, when the leaves fall and the strength of men fails as the sun recedes. The seventh month, or Tishri, is therefore called “Ethanim” for these reasons, and corresponds partly to our September, partly to October, and was formerly the first month of the common year, before God appointed the first month of the sacred year to be Nisan, or March or April, on account of the solemnity of the Pasch, Exodus 12:2; whence the Chaldee in this place translates: Israel was gathered in the month which the ancients called the first month, and which is now the seventh month.
You will say: The temple was finished in the eighth month, as was said chapter 6, last verse; how then is it said here to have been dedicated in the seventh month? Abulensis, Salianus and others answer that the temple, when it was dedicated, was indeed finished as to its principal parts, but did not yet have its entire perfection, but that this was added to it after the dedication, so that in the eighth month it was wholly finished. For Solomon wished to anticipate its entire perfection on account of the solemnity of the feast of Tabernacles in the seventh month, that in it he might dedicate his temple before all the people.
Serarius answers otherwise, namely that the dedication was put off to the following year, and its seventh month, that in the meantime the walls might dry better, and all else necessary for the dedication be more fully prepared. Wherefore the temple was dedicated in the 12th year of Solomon’s reign in the seventh month.
ON THE FESTIVAL DAY,—that is, on the feast of Tabernacles, says Abulensis. But this cannot be said: for that feast began on the 15th day of the seventh month; but here the dedication of the temple was celebrated for 14 days, as is plain from verse 65, after which the people was dismissed on the 23rd day of the same month, as is plain from 2 Paralipomenon 7:10, and from the 15th day of the month to the 23rd day there are not 14 days but only eight. Therefore the festival day is here understood to be this feast of the dedication, which on account of this most magnificent dedication was most solemn. So Vatablus, Tornielli, Serarius and Salianus, who think that this feast of the dedication fell on the eighth day of the seventh month, or “Ethanim”: for from then to the 23rd day, on which the dedication was completed, there are 14 days, of which verse 65. In these 14 days, therefore, is included the feast of Tabernacles, which was most solemn and began on the 15th day of the seventh month, and lasted seven days; whence all the males of all Israel were bound at that time to go to the temple according to the law of Deuteronomy 16:16; wherefore Solomon eagerly seized this occasion of time and feast, that the dedication might be more solemn and celebrated with a greater concourse of the people.
Allegorically, the dedication of the temple signified the dedication of the Church, and of any Christian temple, of which see our Martin de Roa, book On the Birthday, chapter 21.
Tropologically, it signified the dedication of a holy soul, especially of the Blessed Virgin, of which see Peter Damian, sermon 2 On the Nativity of the Blessed Virgin, where he compares her with the temple of Solomon. How the soul becomes the house and temple of God, teaches Philo, book On the Cherubim; St. Macarius, homily 4.