Introduction All things created by God have a purpose (reference to Aristotle’s De caelo), and the purpose of human beings is to know and love God (reference to Augustine); all virtuous actions bring human beings closer to the knowledge of God, but this is especially true with fasting.
Divisio (see above) 1) First part: two types of fasting: a) temporal fasting, i.e. abstinence from food; b) spiritual fasting, i.e. abstinence from vices. Three definitions of temporal fasting (references to Thomas Aquinas): 1. “Natural fasting”, i.e. be fasting before eating (not a virtue, because it is common to everyone); 2. “Moral fasting”, i.e. “abstinence” [scil. from excessive food], connected to the cardinal virtue of temperance: ieiunium est parsimonie virtus abstinentiaque ciborum (quote from Isidore of Seville, Etym. VI, 19, 65). 3. “Fasting for the remission of sins”, imposed by the Church, following the model of Jesus’ fasting during the forty days in the desert. 2) Second part: seven quaestiones: 1. Are we all required to fast during Lent? If we talk about “moral fasting” (cf. supra), it’s the natural law that requires us to fast (reference to Thomas Aquinas), because excessive food cause diseases and death to human beings. Praise of the past, when people lived with few resources: Felix nimium prior etas! / Contenta fidelibus arvis / nec inerti perdita luxu / facilique, sera solebat / ieiunia solvere glande (quote from Boethius, Philosophiae consolatio II, 5, 1-5). Eating soberly keeps one healthy and predisposes him to virtue. If we talk about “fasting for the remission of sins” (cf. supra) - i.e. “abstain from meat, eat only once a day at the ninth hour” -, then anyone who can do so must fast, starting from the years of discernment (i.e. when you become able to distinguish good from evil) in the periods established by the Church, such as Lent. 2. Is not fasting a mortal sin? Yes, it is: whoever disobeys his superior sins; the Church is the “presidente de’ cristiani” (= president of Christians), consequently its precepts must be respected, except in case of necessity - i.e. in case of illness, poverty, old age, or pregnancy -, because “necessity has no law”. 3. Is it a sin to fast on Sunday? Yes, because it is against Christian custom. 4. What time should we eat? At the ninth hour (motivation: expulsion of Adam from Paradise or death of Christ). Anticipating a little is not a sin. 5. Does drinking [wine] in the evening break the fast? No, but without eating bread. 6. Can one be exempt from fasting? Yes, if there is an obvious reason (illness, old age, etc.); in case of doubtful reason, it’s necessary to ask the priest for advice. 7. Does fasting bring merit? Yes, it brings three merits (obedience to the Church, fight against vice, less punishment in life or in Purgatory). 3) Third part: five fruits (i.e. advantages) of fasting, shown by five wounds on the body of Jesus: 1. Right hand = “inhibition”; 2. Left hand = “enlightenment of the intellect”: 3. Right foot = “appeasement”; 4. Left foot = “victory over three enemies: a. over “evil spirits”; b. over “corporal enemies”; c. over difficulties; 5. Chest = “glorification”.

Introduction  Parallel between illness and sin: the puer paraliticus is the sinful soul lying in domo, i.e. in the body, which is despicable as a worldly element; therefore the soul asks God for help, which one can obtain above all by praying.
Divisio (see above) 1) First part: prayer has its origins in the human intellect and manifests itself through the voice (reference to Thomas Aquinas; exemplum: the human heart as an organ, the human will as the organist, prayer as the sound). Prayer can have three different purposes, and consequently three different recipients: 1. Pray for a wish to be granted = prayer to God; 2. Pray to ask for intercession with God = prayer to the saints; 3. Pray for both reasons = prayer to Christ crucified. 2) Second part: four conditions are necessary for prayer: 1. Innocence and purity; 2. Reverence and humility; 3. Faith and hope; 4. Perseverance. 3) Third part: the virtue of prayer is great and has five powers: 1. Ask God for forgiveness and mercy; 2. Increase grace; 3. Win over enemies; 4. Give consolation from worries; 5. Gain access to heaven.

Introduction

Divisio (see above) 1) First part: definition of almsgiving: elemosina est opus, ex quo datur aliquid indigenti, ex compassione, propter Deum (reference to Thomas Aquinas); (pseudo)etymology of the word elemosina deriving from “Eli” (= God) and “mois” (= water), so elemosina = “water of God” because it is as necessary to the poor as water is to human life. 2) Second part: almsgiving has six “ornaments”, i.e. six necessary conditions: 1. "Gratiositas": one must give alms with a happy heart, in fact hilarem datorem diligit Deus (2 Cor 9, 7). If you give alms willingly and with a happy heart, you will be rewarded (exemplum: story of the generous poor man and his rich and miserly neighbour, from Vita dei santi Padri); 2. “Largitade”, i.e. generosity; 3. “Proprietade”: one must give alms from one's own hard-earned goods; 4. “Liberalitade”: one must give alms free from personal interests. Caracciolo addresses women and warns them against "false almsgiving", typical of women who "give alms" to obtain something in return. The fifth and sixth “ornaments” are not described: «Or bastano questi quattro ornamenti de elemosina per la seconda parte» (“Now, these four ornaments are enough for the second part”). 3) Third part: five rewards for giving alms: 1. Multiplication of temporal goods (exemplum: 1 King 17, 16 generosity of the widow with the prophet Elijah); 2. Victory over enemies; 3. Dei placatio, i.e. appeasement of God’s wrath (many exempla in Exodus); 4. Peccatorum purgatio, i.e. forgiveness of sins («just as water quenches a burning fire, so almsgiving quenches sin» [reference to Ecclesiastes 3, 33]; exemplum: Nebuchadnezzar obtains forgiveness of his sins by giving alms [cf. Daniel 4,24]); 5. Vite eterne condonatio, i.e. obtaining eternal life: «almsgiving, although men give it on earth and it seems thrown away, in reality germinates and bears fruit in heaven». Biblical reference: Elemosina enim liberat a morte, et ipsa est que purgat peccata et facit invenire vitam eternam [Toby 4, 11]).

Introduction
-
Division (see above) 1) First part: the community of Christians is organized, like the natural world, into lower and higher elements; there is no superiority by nature, but only by functions (reference to Thomas Aquinas). Priests must be obeyed because their function - mediating the will of God - is superior to others; disobeying priests is like disobeying God (exemplum: 1Kings 15,3 Saul disobeys the prophet Samuel). 2) Second part: obedience not only rewards human beings with temporal goods, but also gives them grace and love towards God and other men. Those who obey their superior enjoy the highest honor in Heaven (reference to Vita dei santi Padri). "Obedience is the mother of all virtues” and si obbediremus Deo, Deus nobis obbediret (reference to Augustine; exemplum: Joshua 10, 12-13 God granted Joshua's request, because “Joshua was obedient to God”). One must always obey willingly; the virtue of obedience makes possible many things that seemed impossible (exemplum: the tree of obedience, from Vita dei santi Padri). 3) Third part: God reserves great punishments for the disobedient (two exempla: Genesis 3, 17 punishment of disobedient Adam; story of the Carthaginian matron and her disobedient children).
Conclusion
The concept that everyone must obey their superior is reiterated.

Introduction The envy is the «mother of discord, stepmother of peace, enemy of all goodness and correct living»; reference to the envy of the ten apostles towards James and John (Mark 10, 45).
Division (see above) 1) First part: quaestio: what is envy? Invidia est tristicia de bono alterius (reference to John of Damascus   apud  Thomas Aquinas [Summa Theologiae, II-II, q. 36 a. 1]); four types of envy: 1. Envy of someone else's good which is harmful to other virtuous men (not a sin, but rather a virtue); 2. Envy of someone else's good, that is, the desire to possess the same good (not exactly envy, but rather “zeal”, i.e. emulation; reference to Aristotle); 3. Do not consider someone worthy of a good (sin); 4. Envying someone else's good because it is superior to ours ("this is that poisonous serpent properly called envy - and it is a mortal sin - from which […] five terrible daughters are born, full of pain: hatred, whispering, detraction, joy in the misfortunes of others and sadness in their fortunes”, reference to Gregory the Great's Moralia in Iob). 2) Second part: the only condition free from envy is poverty, because summa petit livor, proflant altissima venti, / summa petunt dextra fulmina missa Iovis (quote from Ovid, Remedia amoris, vv. 369s.). 3) Third part: the condition of the poor is the better, because they are not envied and, consequently, they are free from the worries of the heart. The best condition is that of the friars because "they have nothing, yet they have everything".
Conclusion Through poverty we obtain earthly grace and heavenly glory.

Introduction
-
Divisio (see above) 1) First part: the enemy can be considered in three ways (reference to Thomas Aquinas): 1. as an enemy, i.e. as a bad and harmful thing that shouldn’t be loved, but rather hated («perfect and good hatred», reference to Psalmi); 2. as a creature of God, and as such must be loved, because God never creates anything bad; 3. as a particular individual, and as such must not necessarily be loved because "it's impossible to know [and consequently to love] all the creatures". 2) Second part: it’s a greater merit to love an enemy; three reasons: 1. "Reward": loving the enemy confers a greater reward, that is, the eternal life; 2. "Inflammation of charity": the reason for merit consists in charity (reference to Thomas Aquinas), and there is more charity in loving the enemy than in loving a friend; to love an enemy requires “a greater fire” (reference to Augustine), i.e. a greater amount of charity; 3. "Readiness" (reference to Hugh of Saint Victor): loving the enemy readily is contrary to natural inclination, therefore it is more meritorious. 3) Third part: three reasons invite us to love the enemy: 1. "Unity of nature": Christus est caput nostrum nosque membra eius (reference to Paul the Apostle; cf. 1Corinthians 11, 3); as in the human body, so in the body of the Church: if one member is in pain, all the others have compassion for him; 2. "Divine obedience": order of Jesus Christ: «Love your enemies and do good to them» (quote from Matthew 5, 44); we must help the enemy; if you cannot do it personally, you must at least recommend the enemy to those who can help him. Three things belong only to God: a. the glory, which consists in the creation of the world; b. the last judgment; c. the vengeance. 3. "Magnificence": forgiving the enemy is a magnificent thing.
Conclusion He who forgives is magnanimous and kind («The magnanimous man doesn’t remember the harm he has received», reference to Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics IV). Exempla: Caesar; Jesus crucified.

Introduction  Interpretation of the thema: the filius defunctus represents «the sinner in mortal sin»; the mater represents the «Church, which becomes a widow when the soul of a Christian dies due to mortal sin».
Divisio (see above) Twelve rules for recognizing mortal sin: 1) First rule: «mortal sin is that which is contrary to charity, which is the life of the soul» (reference to Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae II-II, q. 59, art. 4), i.e. everything that is contrary to the charity of God and of the neighbor is a mortal sin; without charity, in fact, no virtuous action can benefit the salvation of human beings. 2) Second rule: «every transgression against the commandments of God is a mortal sin» (Increpuisti superbos: maledicti qui declinant a mandatis tuis [quote from Psalmi 118, 21]). 3) Third rule: «every transgression against the orders of the Holy Church is a mortal sin» (Si ecclesiam non audierit, sit tibi sicut ethnicus et publicanus [quote from Matthew 18, 17]). 4) Fourth rule: any transgression against the orders of one's ecclesiastical or secular superiors is a mortal sin, because qui potestati resistit, Dei ordinationi resistit (quote from Romans 13, 2); exemplum: not respecting the penance imposed by the confessor (reference to Duns Scotus, cf. General Notes). 5) Fifth rule: not only the act, but also the deliberate intention is a mortal sin; three phases of sin (reference to «a doctrine of St. Gregory» [from Decretum Gratiani, dist. VI, cap. 2]): 1. suggestion (not a sin); 2. unintentional pleasure (venial sin); 3. deliberate intention (mortal sin). 6) Sixth rule: «every pleasure of mortal sin is itself a mortal sin» (reference to Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae II-II, q. 55). 7) Seventh rule: «he who, through his own fault, exposes himself to the risk of mortal sin sins mortally»; exemplum: if one knows that wine can inebriate him and, despite knowing it, gets drunk anyway, then he sins mortally. 8) Eighth rule: «he who consents to someone who commits a mortal sin sins mortally» (Digni sunt morte non solum qui faciunt ea, sed qui consentiunt facienti [quote from Romans 1, 32]). 9) Ninth rule: he sins mortally who, while not liking or approving the sin, gives occasion to others to sin («as established by civil law: “causing the occasion of damage is like doing the damage yourself”»). 10) Tenth rule: «He sins mortally who, while neither approving nor causing the sin, doesn’t oppose it as much as he can» (Error cui non resistitur, approbatur; the maxim is attributed to Gregory VII, but in reality it is by Innocent III [cf. Decretum Gratiani I, dist. LXXXIII, cap. 3). Any - temporal or spiritual - superior who is not aware of the sins of his subordinates and, therefore, doesn’t counteract them, commits a sin (reference to Liber extra, tit. XLI, cap. 10); similarly, one is responsible for the sins of one's godchild (reference to Decretum Gratiani III, dist. IV).
The eleventh and twelfth rules are voluntarily omitted («Lassiamo le altre due regule»).

Introduction
-
Divisio (see above) 1) First part: the saints, by praying, can intercede for our salvation and help us obtain grace from God (reference to Gregory the Great, Moralia in Iob 12). 2) Second part: the «fiery prayer» made by Christ in the Garden of Gethsemane was so effective that it enabled all human beings to obtain God's grace (reference to Thomas Aquinas). 3) Third part: Superbis resistit Deus, humilibus autem dat gratiam (quote from 1Peter 5, 5). Exempla of pride: Lucifer »; Eve. Exempla of humility: David; the centurion (Domine, non sum dignus ut intres sub tectum meum, quote from Matthew 8, 8 [miracle of the healing of the centurion’s servant]); the woman of Canaan (Nam et catelli edunt de micis que cadunt de mensa domini sui, quote from Matthew 15, 27 [miracle of the exorcism of the daughter of the woman of Canaan]); the Publican (reference to the parable of the Pharisee and the Publican [Luke 18, 9-14]). 4) Fourth part: shame drives away things contrary to virtue in two ways (reference to Thomas Aquinas): 1. out of shame human beings often keep away from vice; 2. shame of one's vices often induces human beings to confession. 5) Fifth part: persevering in prayer and charitable behaviour makes it possible to obtain grace; «“Dimandate e riceverete” (cioè la gratia), “battete e ve serà aperto”» (reference to Luke 11, 5-13).

Introduction
-
Divisio (see above)  1) First part: human beings can’t know by certain and true knowledge whether they will be saved or damned, because that would mean knowing as much as God. 2) Second part: God sometimes reveals salvation to someone. Exemplum: Moses asks for forgiveness for the sin of idolatry: “Dimitte, Domine, populo tuo noxam hanc, aut dele me de libro vite” (Exodus 32, 31-32); “liber vitae” = the certain and true knowledge, i.e. God’s knowledge (reference to Thomas Aquinas), consequently Moses knew by revelation that he was written in the liber vitae. 3) Third part: parallel between illness and sin: just as death can be predicted from the signs of illness, damnation can be predicted from the signs of sin. On the contrary, salvation can be predicted from positive signs (for example going to church every day, hearing mass willingly and with devotion, going to confession several times a year, etc.).
Conclusion  Even if we are certain of our destiny, we must never stop doing well and even better; multiple reasons [but only one is developed]: the first, in case of certain damnation, is to obtain a lighter punishment (exemplum from Vita dei santi Padri: a damned soul reveals to Macarius (Saint) the different conditions of the damned depending on the severity of their sin [the same exemplum is used in the sermon T19/6 Friday after Invocavit]).

Introduction Just as with his death Christ wanted to give life to humanity dead due to sin, so with his temptations he wanted to give consolation to human beings who fall into temptation. Christ wanted to be tempted for three reasons (cf. Main division, 3; the following Latin quotations appear to be taken almost verbatim from Jacobus de Voragine, Quadragesimale, sermo 9 [cf. General Notes]): 1. Ut nostras tentationes vinceret; 2. Ut diabolo qui esset filiu Dei occultaret; 3. Ut temptatis facilius condescendere patteret.
The devil suspected that Jesus was the son of God for a number of reasons (reference to John Chrysostom), but to be sure, he wanted to test him with three temptations, the same temptations with which he tempted and defeated Adam: 1. Gluttony: Jesus overcomes temptation by answering the devil that non in solo pane vivit homo, sed in omni verbo quod procedit de ore Dei (quote from Matthew 4,4), because the human being is not only body (composed of four elements [reference to Aristotle]), but also soul. 2. Pride: Jesus overcomes temptation by answering the devil “Non temptabis Dominum Deum tuum sicut scriptum est, sed illi soli servies” (quote from Deutteronomy 6, 16 and Matthew 4, 7). 3. Greed: Jesus overcomes temptation by answering the devil “Vanne Satanaxo (cioè a l’inferno). El gli è scritto: adorarai el tuo Segnior Dio et servirai a lui solo” (quote from Matthew 4, 10).
Divisio (see above) 1) First part: Inferte omnem decimationem in horreum meum, ut sit cibus in domo mea, et probate me si non aperuero vobis cataractas celi (Malachi 3, 10): from this quotation it is deduced that tempting God is not a sin, since God doesn’t command anything that is a sin; however, we also read in the Scripture Non temptabis Dominum Deum tuum (cf. supra). How can this doubt be resolved? Firstly, it must be clarified what “to tempt” means: “to tempt” means “to test”, "put to the test", and this can be done with words or deeds; thus, God can be tested with words (exemplum: Jesus tested by the Pharisees [Matthew 22, 15-22]) or with deeds (exemplum: not caring when ill and relying solely on God; Caracciolo calls this attitude “madness”, because «God created everything in an orderly manner» and, therefore, also created doctors and medicines so that we can use them when necessary). In conclusion, since all temptations arise from ignorance, tempting God out of mere curiosity is a mortal sin as it denotes a lack of faith. 2) Second part: the “latrìa” is an exclusive «worship of God as the supreme and perfect being, the beginning, cause and end of all things in heaven and on earth, whom the human being must obey as the creature obeys the creator, the servant obeys the lord, the child obeys the good father» (reference to Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae III). Four reasons why only one God should be worshipped: 1. “Dignity”: the higher the rank of someone, the greater the honour and reverence they deserve [follows a direct instruction to the preacher to «discuss the temporal ranks of kings, emperors and dukes, and the spiritual ranks of bishops, cardinals, pope, etc.»]; 2. “Generosity”: every good is given by God (Omne datum optimum, et omne donum perfectum desursum est, descendens a Patre luminum [quote from James 1, 17]); 3. “Fidelity”: after baptism, the Christian promises faith, obedience and respect to Jesus Christ; therefore, just as - according to the Old Testament - those who were unfaithful in marriage deserve stoning, so those who are unfaithful to God deserve Hell; 4. “Abundance”: the reward for faithful Christians (i.e. eternal life in Paradise) is the most abundant of those promised by the various religions. [3) Third part: the third part has already been developed in the Introduction, cf. supra]

Introduction
-
Divisio

1) First part: Ferrer identifies, on the basis of the Gospel text, four human exaltations of Jesus Christ: 1. Exaltatio dolorosa: concerning the pain of Christ on the cross; Christ experienced all human suffering (reference to Thomas Aquinas) in three ways (ex parte hominum; ex parte eorum in quibus homo potest pati; quantum ad corporis membra); 2. Exaltatio gloriosa: concerning the exaltation of Christ in the resurrection; 3. Exaltatio celestialis: concerning the exaltation of Christ in the ascension; 4. Exaltatio spiritualis: concerning the soul of Christ; Ferrer then introduces a discussion on free will. 2) Second part: concerning the cecitas Iudeorum, i.e. the fact that the Jews are unable to understand the words of Christ (reference to John 7, 35-36) in the same way as the learned, unlike the humble and ignorant, don’t immediately understand the words of the preacher. However, the Jews were not wrong in assuming that Jesus would go and instruct the peoples (according to Ferrer, the figura of that is in the Gideon’s episode [Judges 6-8]). Then Ferrer explains moraliter the sentence “Quaeretis me et non invenietis” (John 7, 34) saying that three factors must be taken into account to find Christ: time (tempus), place (locus) and manner (modus); for the laity, the appropriate time to find Christ is Lent; the proper place to find Christ is this world (because finding Christ in this world per gratiam is necessary to find him “in the other world” - i.e. after the death - per gloriam); the proper manner to find Christ, finally, is by the renunciation of sins. 3) Third part: “In die magno festivitatis […]” (John 37-39), i.e. the “Festival of Tabernacles”, celebrated for eight days, the last of which is celeberrimus atque sanctissimus. Ferrer's moral (moraliter) explanation: as the theological virtues are superior to the moral ones, so the theological intellects (i.e. the spiritual senses: allegorical, tropological and anagogical) are superior to the moral ones. Then Ferrer interprets the gospel text on the basis of the three spiritual senses: the eight days (7+1) of the Festival of Tabernacles correspond to the seven weeks of Lent plus Easter Day (allegorical sense); the Festival can be interpreted as the life, the seven days as the seven moral and theological virtues, the eighth and last feast day as the last day of life (tropological sense); the Festival can be interpretated as the world duration, the seven days as the seven ages of the world, the eighth and last feast day as the judgement day.

Introduction In the introduction of the sermon, Ferrer states that he wants to clarify, after talking about the burial of Christ's body (cf. sermon T26 Good Friday), where Christ's soul went and what it did before the resurrection. In this way, the preacher can introduce and describe the quatuor loca inferni where Christ's soul descended to visit the souls there: according to the doctrina fidei christiane, in fact, for as long as Christ's body was in the tomb, his soul descended into hell (“Sicut fuit Jonas in ventre ceti tribus diebus et tribus noctibus, sic erit filius hominis in corde terre tribus diebus et tribus noctibus” [Matthew 12, 40] = Jonah as a figuration of Christ). Although Christ's body and soul were separated in those days, nevertheless his divinity was never separated from either body or soul (Ferrer explains this concept through two similarities: the divinity of Christ is not divided by the separation of body and soul, just as an apple that, cut in two, retains its smell in both parts, or a crystal that, cut in two, continues to reflect the light of the sun in both parts). Divisio 1) First part: concerning the first place of hell, i.e. the “prison of the damned” (carcer damnatorum), where the Christ’s soul manifested its divinity “per rigorosam increpationem, non secundum essentiam sed secundum effectum” (reference to Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae III, q. 55 art. 2). Christ’s soul descended to this place for two reasons: 1. “Ad ligandum Luciferum” (to exemplify this reason, Ferrer uses the story of Tobias and the angel Raphael following Beda's interpretation); 2. “Propter rigorosam increpationem”, i.e. to rebuke the souls of the damned (including those of the “magnos philosophos, Platonem, Aristotelem et alios” [reference to Jerome]). 2) Second part: concerning the second place of hell, i.e. the Limbo of the Infants (limbus puerorum), “ubi sunt omnes pueri qui decesserunt cum solo peccato originali”. Christ’s soul descended to these souls per gloriosam consolationem, telling them to give thanks to God for their condition which, unlike that of the damned, provides exemption from the sensory punishments of hell. 3) Third part: concerning the third place of Hell, i.e. the “place of purgation” (locus purgandorum), “ubi est ignis [that will last until the Judgement Day], sed non sunt ibi demones, qui nullus ibi intrat qui non sit in gratia dei”. Christ’s soul descended to this place per copiosam liberationem. Quaestio posed by the Doctors of the Church (reference to Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae III, q. 52 art. 8): did Christ free all the souls that were in purgatory when he descended into it? According to Ferrer, this question can be answered in two ways, namely: 1. “per rigorem iusticie”: in this sense, we must understand that Christ only freed souls who have completed the time of penance (this is the Thomas Aquinas’ interpretation);  2. “per dulcedinem misericordie”: in this sense, we must understand that Christ freed all souls in purgatory (two similarities: Christ as a newly crowned king who, entering the city, frees the prisoners; Christ as a newly elected pope who grants large indulgences and numerous graces). 4) Fourth part: concerning the fourth place of Hell, i.e. the “bosom of Abraham” (sinus Abrae), where the souls of the holy fathers were, without suffering any pain, from the beginning of the world until Christ's resurrection: then, when Christ's soul descended to this place, they saw his divinity and received glory and paradise (reference to Augustine).

Introduction Three quaestiones: Why it is more meritorious (merit) to love the enemies and how should be done (references to Peter Lombard and Thomas Aquinas). How one can do it (reference to Augustine). In which way one has to forgive the insults, namely by giving up on rancour and its signs, yet asking for the restitution of goods and reputation.  - Division [Note references to previous days] - First part Foundation of all is mutual love (caritas). “Debemos ergo nos invicem amare” in three ways:   Debitum persolvendum Eternum premium conseguendum Damnationis periculum evadendum 1.1. Forgive all debts, as requested in the Pater noster and quoting the parable of the unforgiving servant (Matthew 18:23-35). 1.2. Love is laborious but it yields an exrtraordinary eternal reward: “est grande labor in hoc seculo, sed grande premium in futuro”. The example is saint Stephen [2T]. 1.3. Hatred is deathly dangerous, it must be avoided, since it is like an mortal wound hidden in the mind and darkening the soul: “qui enim odit habet in mente letale vulnus et gerit in corde tenebris peccatorum” [2V].  -- Second part  Actions are good or bad depending on intention, this idea is applied to fasting, prayer and almsgiving. This applies even to the crucifixion of Christ: it is undoubtedly a good work, since from it salvation derives, yet the Jews (indicated as perpetrators) did not receive any reward, since they did it out of envy [2X]. “Deus enim cor interrogat et non manum” – interior intention is crucial. Superius elevata intentionis rectitudine Interius coaptata incorruptionis pulcritudine Inferius subiugata ex donationis celsitudine 2.1. Intention orients the actions to their final goal, which is God. Image of the crossbower who has to close one eye and open the other, which means: close the eye to the worldly seductions and keep the other fixed on Christ [2Z]. 2.2. One needs first of all to purify the heart to avoid to maculate the good works. It is useless to worry to be sparkling clean outside (graphic description) while neglecting the purity of the heart. Reference to the hypocrites as whitewashed tombs (Matthew 23:27). Discussion on hypocrisy, simulated sanctity and desire to be noted (it can be only vanity or a lesser sin, yet can be also a mortal sin) [3B.] 2.3. one needs humility, do not inflate. One must think that all goods derive from grace (“ex gratia dei”) and consider to be a sinner. Even the saints still (rightly) considered themselves as sinners: example told by Bonaventure about the reaction of saint Francis when a friar told him that saw in a dream the celestial throne prepared for him [3D]. -  Third part  The way one performs almsgiving also matters. This is discussed on the basis of the biblical sentence: “Ante mortem benefac amico tuo et exporrigens da pauperi secundum vires tuas” (Sir 14.13) – which becomes a sort of thema of this section. Conferentis celeritas Accipientis propinquitas Pacientis necessitas 3.1. Give alms quickly, willingly, without delay – since death is always close and one cannot delegate the relatives. An hermit had a vision: two tables, one full of food, the other empty, the latter symbolizes the good works delegated to others. Several quotations from the moral works of Seneca. Usual reference to the canon law on jesters (histriones) and prostitutes [3G] 3.2. When the need is similar, one first must help relatives and friends and then strangers. Issue: shall one make distinction between who has to receive alms? Discussion on the proverb: “Sudet elemosina in manu tua donec invenies iustum cui des” [3H], which dates to Augustine and Gregory the Great (not mentioned), and ultimately to the Didaché. First, alms must be given to preacher and prelate. Second, give without any distinction to those who need food. Next, if the need is similar, start from the neighbours. 3.3. Priority is to give to the poor that suffer the most. The sermon ends by commenting the epistle of the day: Frange esurienti panem tuum... (Isaiah 58:7), with a quite direct to treat the poor with respect: “induc in domo tuam, non in stabulum porcorum in locum despectum” [3I].  -

Introduction (also to the sermon collection and first three sermons) Line of preachers: Christ, the apostles, the current preachers Preaching to disseminate and grow the faith, since the absence of faith (infidelitas) is the origin (origo) of all the evil of the world, since those who don’t believe in the punishment of wrong actions do not restrain themselves. The true faith (vera fides) is instead the foundation (fundamentum) all the good. Hence, it will be the key topic of all the sermon collection: «Idcirco de ipsa vera fide tractaturus continue» (f. b1r) Program of the first three sermons: preaching; sermon; fruits of listening. Three causes of the faith: revelation (superior), miracles/proclamation (exterior); mental adhesion (internal). Yet, its origin is in God, so ifaith is for grace, not for merits.  - Division (see above) -  Corpus of sermon 1) The mission (missio) necessary to preach (reference to Romans 10.15). Ecclesiastical hierarchy, different levels: the pope, the bishop, the prelates – limits for the lay people, and the duty of the priests (curati). Friars preach thanks to privileges (ex privilegio). Heretics instead usurp this office: they claim to have a direct and invisible mission given directly from God, yet, to be true it should be accompanied by miracles (see exempla at the end) or testimony of the Scripture, such as for Moses and John the Baptist.  - 2) Preaching as laborious task (laboriosa actio), since it is universal, as attested by four sources: Scripture; rational judgment (censura); risk of loss; future rewards. 2.1. A series of predictable biblical quotations. 2.2. Three reasons: a) ratio diletionis, i.e. the love of the neighbours, since preaching is a help for eternal salvation; b) ratio electionis, since preaching is the best task in the Church («predicatio in ecclesia militante est melior aliis virtuosis operibius»; f. b2v) so it is superior to confess sinners and to baptize (cf. Paul, quoting from Thomas Aquinas) also because the common good is superior to the personal good; c) ratio donationis, the few who has the gift of wisdom and the ability to speak (diserta locutio) cannot dismiss it for laziness or fear, according to the command: «gratis accepitis, gratis date». 2.3. Risk of eternal loss: if you don’t help/instruct those who need it, you are a ‘murderer’ («et talis homicida appellandus»), as one who does not feed those who are starving. Reference to the parable of talents (Matthew 25:14-30). 2.4. Future reward, since it is a holy negotium and a fruitful lucrum to contribute to save the souls for who Christ shed his blood – the example should be the apostles and martyrs who exposed themselves to death for this mission. Direct address to the preachers: “O vos predicatores divini verbi [...] vos certe estis lux mundi, vos estis cultores vinee dei altissimi, vos estis duces gregis dominicis, vos estis expurgatores et terrores demonum, vos estis causa salutis animarum...” – and admonitions to the negligent preachers. It serves also as a recap of what just said. - 3) Fruitful, since preaching is public teaching («Dicens: Predicate, hoc est publice docete»; f. b3v). Proverbs 30.29-30: "tria sunt qui bene gradiunt..". Lion (Christ), rooster (apostles), ram (prelates).    3.1. Follow the words/example of Christ, who preached wiselly, fervently, and patiently (sapienter; ferventer; patienter). He waited until he was thirty, surely without being lazy before that (so, probability he worked as carpenter...). So a preacher should not be hasty to teach, but prepare himself carefully. Yet, preacher should NOT imitate Christ in his harsh critics, when he announced the explusion of someone from salvation: «non omnia Chirsti sacra sunt imitanda [...] non debet publice aliquem in sermone reprehendere» (f. b4r).  3.2. Apostles did like the rooster, which first hits its wings before crying (topos). Interesting reference to the presence of the weathercock on the top of towers: «Et tales (?) quam chari deo et ecclesie sacre sint ostenditur ex hoc quod supra pinaculum figura galli frequenter reponitur aperto ore se contra ventum contrarium volvendo, ut ex hoc innuat quod preco veritatis contra populi vicia clamare sit paratus» (f. b4r) 3.3. Examples of the Church of the origins. The miracles listed by Matthew 28 now happen on a spiritual level, in the fight against evil. So, although invisible, these miracles are even greater: «Que nimirum miracula tanto maiora sunt quanto spiritualia, tanto maiora quanto per hec non corpora sed anime suscitantur» (f. b4v). New vivid address to the preachers: «O devoti predicatores et spirituales canes [...] per vos dilatatur catholica fides, per vos donantur virtutes omnes, per vos diriguntur ad salutem homines. Felix terra et beata regna civitates et castella ubi resonant verba dei, ubi seritur vestra doctrina. Et econtrario, meledictum illud regnum...». Also this time, it serves also as a recap, mentioning again the three symbolic animals. -  One has to be also incited by the examples of holy preachers. Three detailed exempla. Saint Dunstan of Canterbury (d. 988), «in sua legenda», who postponed his ‘ascension’ to heaven: when a host of angels invited him he said that first he had to preach, since it was the vigil of the Ascension and many people came to hear his sermon: «Hodie est solemnissimum dies et incumbit mihi pane verbi dei plebem reficere et ostendere illis quomodo ad hoc gaudium possunt pervenire, propter quod multi convenerunt, nec debeo eos decipere, ideo venire non possum» (f. b4v). He preached then three times during the same liturgy, before he died.  Saint Equitius (d. 570), as referred by Gregory the Great in his Dialogues. This is an interesting case, which connects with the first point of the sermon. The story is about a preacher without ‘canonical mission’ and for this reason accused to usurp the ministry; yet, he had a miraculous mission directly from God and, when he was accused by his adversaries (the prelates of Rome), another miracle and the vision had by the pope will confirm it. Negative example of the damned cancellarius of Paris, who had a great fame as preacher so much so that when he preached all the Dominican and Franciscan friars stopped from their work and went to hear him. The bishop, who appreciated him, when visiting him before his death, commands the cancellarius to appear him after 13 days to certify about his destiny (which is supposed to be of glory). Yet, with great surprise, when this request is fulfilled, it turned out that this great preacher had been condemned to hell, since he sought worldly honours and pleasures, acting as if the wisdom came from himself and not from God. Additionally, when he appeared after 13 days from death, he thought a long time had passed and that it was already the doomsday, “quia sicut nix cadit de celo, ita intrant anime ad infernum” (f. b. 5v).

Introduction Echoing the prophet (thema), the issue is why God allows a people so evil and unfaithful like the Turks to prosper and oppress the Christians: “Ex quo gentem infidelem, impiam et prevaricatricem thurcorum permittit prosperari et christianum populum opprimere?” (f. r5r). Several quotations from Job and Jeremiah. The duration of this oppression surprises the people, who don’t understand its causes; it causes also grumbling about God’s injustice. “Quare licet thurci impii conculcaverunt tuos fideles, devorant, lacerant, et tandiu affligunt? Sunt iam fere anni 870 ab initio secte usque nunc, nec tamen apparet signum consumationis ipsius, de quo nedum multi mirantur tante durationis causam non invenientes, verumetiam plerique murmurant de dei providentia et quissima iusticia” (f. r5r). It's not clear to what the 870 years exactely refer (if it is the Egira, it would refer to 1492 (it would be puzzling); yet later in the sermon, the origin of the Turks is indicated as 666, so it cannot be a reference to it).    Divisio (see above) 

1. Persecution is just since it is a punishment: “Ista christianorum atrox persecutio mahumetica iuste nobis est inflicta propter nostram punitiuonem, quod probemus tripliciter” (f. r5r); the evidences are: a) prophecies, b) reasons, c) revelations. 1.1. Prophecies. In the Bible the prophets announced the persecution of the synagogue – ad fortiori, there are prophecies of the persecutions of the Church. The first and key reference (here and below) is the Pseudo-Methodius. There is first a long series of quotations, which contain vivid and dramatic description of the Muslim violence on Christians. The quotations already contain two key concepts: this is a punishment (castigatio) for the way Christians sinned against the divine law; the persecution will reveal the true faithful (fideles). Attention to geographic description, a sort of geopolitics of history (as in other sermons); see f. r5v.  The cause was a triple separation: from Christ, heresy; from the apostolic seat, disobedience; from Roman empire, rebellion (the reference here is to the Greeks). Interesting reference to the discourse of the Venice orator, Bernardo Giustiniani in front of the pope, as a way to chart (again) the Turkish expansion (in which, stand out the lost of two empires, those of Constantinople  and Trebizond). Cyril’s letter [?], interpreted by Joachim of Fiore’s commentary to the Lamentations: the buck that eats the flash of the sheep symbolizes Muhammad that eats alive the Christians (the flash of Christ, the sheep) who join his sect (secta): “et dentibus suis carnis crudas agnorum dilacerabit, quia parvuli et adulti utriusque sexus relicta fide Chirsti sectam Mahumeti assument” (f. r6r). Reference also to the prophecies of Hildegard of Bingen (with the date 1143) and of Birgitta of Sweden. 1.2. Reasons: justice and sins. With a pessimistic note: while at the time of the martyrs the persecution strengthened the faith, now it decreases it: “In presenti autem afflictione fides non tantum augmentatur, quantum diminuitur, ac maxima blasphemia deo et sanctis eius infertur” (f. b6v). The persecution is due to the crimes of the Christians, mainly three major sins (crimina): “Unde causam huiuscemodi persecutionis ex scripturis inveniemus tria horrenda crimina in ecclesia dei multiplicata sunt”: sodomy (peccatum contra naturam), with references to Letter to Romans and to previous castigations of sodomites: the deluge, the destruction of Sodom, and their death during Christmas night (source Jerome: “et ut dicit Hieronimus: in nocte nativitatis, anteque Christus nasceretur, in hoc peccato laborantes sunt extincti”; f. r7r); ignoble taking of the holy communion, which is labeled as “crimen maximum”, with reference to Thomas Aquinas, since it is “as if one kills Christ”; disobedience, in particular applied to schismatics. 1.3. Sure revelations. Interpretation of Apocalypse 16, the seven bowels (phialae) full of the wrath of God, which represents seven persecutions to the Church. The fifth are the Turks, since the throne of the beast is Constantinople – with a reference to “quodam tractatu disputato in capitulo generali fratrum predicatorum” (f. r7r). The sermon mentions also the vision of a Carthusian in the convent of Raromot (!) in Carniola: in an ecstasy he was brought in front of tribunal of Christ, who asks him why the Church prays so much while instead it has abandoned him. At the announcement of the tribulations that will soon hit the Church, the monk asks two things, which remains without reply: whether also Rome will be conquered by the Turks, and if the faithful will succumb in the spiritual battle: “Demum post modicum resumptis viribus frater de duobus petiit informari a Christo, scilicet: An Rhomana civitas esset a Thurcis capienda; et an in futuro bello, quod in spiritu cognoverat committendum, ipsi fideles succumberentur. Ad que respondit Christus quod non expediret hoc ipsum scire” (f. r7v) Invective against vices, as a way to mention again the main sins.
2. The end of the Turks’ persecution is close [yet, not so close after all] and the sermon deals with two aspects: why it was so long; when it will end. 2.1. The domination was so long due to two reasons: first, as the Postilla of Peter of Burgos points out, they are not idolaters as previous persecutors, so God is less pressured to intervene. It started in the year 666 (symbolism of Revelations), yet “in ista secta mahumetica pessima est infidelitas sine idolatria”; second, they do not directly only to apostate the faith: “nec directe cogunt ad apostatandum a fide” – they just ask to pay a fee, and to pay it does not diminish the dignity of the Church: “Unde vivere abicere et sub iugo servitutis non minuit veritatem ecclesiastice dignitatis” (f. r8r) [a sort of realistic position]; third, they do not recognice the divinity of Christ, yet they appreciate his human qualities – so again God is less compelled to intervene.
   2.2. When will it end? Ample quotation of the Pseudo-Methodius, from which it is derived the number of 56 years, yet without being sure where their start has to be put: “Nescimus tamen unde debent incipi, si a captione Costantinopolitane vel a dominio perfecto grecie” – counting from the fall of Constantinople it would be until 1509, yet it is mentioned – as other possible starting point – the Turkish conquest of Albania (i.e. 1478). Reference to an Islamic prophecy of their own defeat, mentioned by Scotus saying that it was found in a Muslim book in Damietta, which prophesizes that a Christian king will conquer and destroy Mecca and disperse the bons of Muhammad - this will fulfil the promise of the announced of the Gospel in all the word (Matthew 28) and will be end history [cfr. link with the prophecy of the last emperor]. The sermon mentions also the revelations of Hildegard of Bingen, Brigitta of Sweden  and Catherine of Siena who praised preaching to convert the people. Further reference is to Nicholas of Lyra, who refers to the Liber Iudicum ordinariorum a Jewish book of prophesy, connected with the announcement of the raising son of the widow of Zarephath, which states that the world will last 6000 years: 2000 under vanity, 2000 under law, 2000 under the Messiah. Since the period under the Messiah is of 2000 years, and during it the Gospel will be announced to everyone, the end of the Muslim domination should be close [yet, it remains quite an ample margin!]. How it will happen? Again a reference to Pseudo-Methodius: when all seems lost, it will rise “rex christianorum et romanorum”... 3.  There are two reasons why their domination cannot last [sic!]: Muslim usurped the power, conquering it only by means of their weapons; their origin is mean – this is true for Muhammad but even more for the Turks - here there is a long insertion on their history, taken from the Chronicon by Antoninus of Florence – remote link with the history of Troy, their entrance in Persia as people of herders, gradual affirmation, arriving until the conquest of Constantinople in 1453 under Muhammed II.
   Final invocation to God, asking his intervention soon – with a last mention of the prophecy of Pseudo-Methodius about the role of the king of Huns, i.e. now Hungary.