Introduction As poison is worse than a sword and a false friend worse than a false coin, so it was the falsity and simulation of the Pharisees who asked Jesus for a sign. This leads to two brief quaestiones: whether and how it is licit to praise other people; why the Pharisees sinned mortally by calling Jesus "master" – although he was it. The latter include a discussion on how action and intention need to be joined, since both need to follow the law of God. Division - First part Main theme is ingratitude, first presented by commenting the Gospel episode (postillatio) and then moraliter by considering the Christians who – having received more benefits than the Jews – must thank God (reference to moral teaching of Seneca and, on a spiritual level, in particular to the special gift of the eucharist). Three possible mistakes: “De huius modi beneficiis et donis acceptis: Quidam de deo non cogitant. Quidam deum de beneficiis non honorant. Quidam dei beneficia exasperant” (6V). 1.1. To forget the benefits that God gave connectes with the sensuality of the flesh (voluptas carni) – reference to Plato and the opposition between soul and body. 1.2. Ungrateful people who do not give thanks to God are like a pork, which eats acorns without looking at the tree, i.e. without raising its eyes. An exemplum from the Vitas patrum: in a vision an old monk sees part of his fellow monks eating white bread and honey, while the others eating shit (stercus). The first are those who «in timore et gratiarum actione sedent at mensam», while the other are those who «murmurant, detrahunt et male locuntur in mensa, nec gratias dicunt» (6X). 1.3. Ungrateful is also to ask continuously God for more, without realizing that in the Passion everything has already been given to us. Seneca’s exemplum (De beneficiis) of the condemnation of a soldier ungrateful with the one who saved him from shipwreck. Allegorical application to the Christians, saved from death (the shipwrek), welcomed at home (the church), nourished with the eucharist: they promise a lot and then maintain very little («multa promittimus et pauca solvimus»; 6Y [note the use of the first person plural]), so Christ – the saviour - will expose our fault in front of God the father, who will impress the marks (stigmata) of eternal damnation on them. Second part  Interpretation of the parable of the return of the unclean spirit (parable): in the allegory (allegorice), the devil has left the gentile, who welcomed Christ with faith, and now inhabits the Jews («ideo recendente dyabolo a gentilibus ad iudeos est reversus, in quibus nunc per infidelitatem et obstinationem dicitur inhabitare»; 6Z). On a moral level (moraliter), the parable concerns the recidivist who returns to sin and the danger of his/her condition, since «per talem recidivationem sit: Homo debilior ad resurgendum. Dyabolus fortior ad invadendum. Deus difficilior ad indulgendum». 2.1. By repeating a sin, a person gets less sensible to its relevance and more tied to it do to the habit. Image of the fish or bird in the net. 2.2. Moral interpretation of the parable. The devil is expelled by penance, yet it might come back – it has no power but it can knock at the door of the heart both using fantasies in the memory («movendo fantasmata malorum in memoria reservata incendendo per desiderium amoris»; 6Z) or using the seven vices (seven capital sins). A quaestio about how can be interpret the return of previous sins, if they were forgiven. Indeed, it is the new sin of ungratefulness for their forgiveness that is added to the new sins. Hence, one has to confess it without repeating the confession of all the previous sins (unclear reference: «ut dicit Lodovicus in summa sua») [note the pastoral outcome of this interpretation]. 2.3. God is less ready to forgive those who repeatedly despised his mercy. Discussion whether the repetition of a sin makes it worst, with a detailed reference to the position of Bonaventure, who depicted four stages of sin: interior consent; action; habit; final absence of repentance. The last stage is final and cannot be forgiven, while the other three are connected with the three episodes of resurrections in the Gospel, which symbolically happen in three different places: at home, on the door of the city, in the tomb. Third part Jesus praises the grace given to those who perform good deeds. Explanation of the scene of the Gospel, when the Virgin Mary and the relatives of Jesus call him outside. It was an insidious request, since he would abandon his pastoral engagement showing human feelings. On a moral level, it teaches that one must choose by considering the utility and dignity of things, and this is true also at a spiritual level. «Ideo quilibet debet ea [spiritualia] preeligere et preponere et hoc quo ad tria, scilicet: Temporis prioritatem. Intentionis principalitatem. Ordinis dignitatem» (7E).  3.1. One must choose virtue while s/he is young, without waiting the old age – simile  of the wax, flexible only when is hot. And exemplum of the miller who had a donkey, which he did not force when it was young, and that later on refused to work and kicked the miller, killing him. The donkey symbolizes the body: if it is not dominated when one is young, it would condemn him/her to the eternal death. 3.2. Centrality of the intention - and quaestio on how to interpret the command: «Omnia in gloriam dei facite» (1 Corinthians 10 ). The solution seems to be not that each act needs to be directly connected to the glory of God, but that it becomes an habit, as the direct exhortation sates: «Ad hoc enim debemus tendere et hoc desiderare, quod ad talem statum perveniamus quod omnes actiones nostras et affectiones principlai intentione ad deum referamus» (6I). 3.3. The necessity to put spiritual before worldly things is exemplified by saint Luis of Toulouse, quoting John XXII’s the bull of canonization («unde in bulla eius translatione scribit Iohnnis Papa XXII: Ludovicus ut sol refulgens in virtute ...»; 6K).

Introduction Any novelty is hard to believe, hence the need of several apparitions of Jesus after his resurrection so that the disciples might be able to believe it - quaestio: why did not Jesus remain continuously with them in that period? His absence serves the process of internalization and reflection. His continuous presence would be emotionally overwhelming (as for a lover the presence of the beloved). Divisio First part The disciples returned to fish since being a fisher was not a sinful activity (difference with the case of Matthew, who had been a moneylander). On the moral level (moraliter) the reflection on the laws about fishing (who can fish where) leads to the consideration of the situation of the sinner who – as a fish that escaped from a private and safe pool (i.e. the church) – is exposed to anyone who tries to fish them. There are three types of fishers: God, the preacher, the devil. “Hominem ideo sic in libertate vagantem extra ecclesia tres piscatores capere nituntur scilicet: Deus qui est proprius et supremus Homo predicator et medius Dyabolus raptor et pessimus” (48A) 1.1. God the father is a fisher in the creation, and the Son and the Holy Spirit joined him in this activity (as the disciples in the pericope joined Peter). The rebellion of Lucifer and the sin of the man are a rupture in the original net, so it was necessary to try to another strategy by sending the son to fish with the hook (his divinity) and the bait (his humanity): “voluit mittere filium suum in capturam alteram ut hamo deietatis piscature que humanitate als mit einem kerder [vernacular expression; macaronic] tegit deitatem...» (48B). In this way, on the one hand the devil (the great whale) was deceived by the bait, captured and closed in hell; at the same time – with the same hidden hook – caught many people who took from hell to heaven (harrowing of hell). Not, the eucharist is an is even more sophisticate hook, since not only the divinity is hidden (as it was in the incarnation) but also the humanity. However, when it is taken in a condition of sin, one condemns him/herself, as said by the apostle. 1.2. Common place of the preacher as fisher; however, at the beginning the fish was easier, since now the church got old («antiquata») and the hearts of the people are hardened by vices and sins. Three things obstacle the fishing: a) the wind pushes the fishes to stay to the sea bottom – so the negative inspirations by devils and evil people; b) transparent water allows the fishes to see the hook – so the bad companies that divert people from listening the word of God; c) an inappropriate net, which might be with too large or too narrow holes – so many listeners, when they hear a too strict preaching abandon the church, and this might dishearten the preacher. 1.3. The devil has many strategies to fish the souls, i.e. through many types of sins. Brief outline of the devil’s hand, with its five fingers targeted to different type of people: «Het enim manus dyaboli quinque digitos habet: symoniam in clericis, rapinam in nobilibus, usuram in burgensibus, furtum in latronibus, et circumventionem in mercatoribus» (48E). Second part The apparition of Jesus on the shore as symbol of the need to stick to him who will help to escape from the shipwrek in the dangerous water of this world and from the pirates, i.e. the devil: «Adhereamus ergo illo firmo fundamento ut liberari possumus a naufragio et crudeli pirato dyabolo, quia Iesus stat ante nos in littore ad designandum quod immobiliter vult nobis adesse (?), si cordialiter eum diligamus. Stabiliter in eum confidamus. Firmiter in eum credamus» (48G) [Note the use of the first-person plural]. 2.1. Since we are unstable, we need to stay attached to Christ by means of love («debemus ergo nos qui sumus instabiles vinculo amoris ad Christum ligare et stringere»), instead the devil is a lord, who destroys those who are linked to him, as explained in the fable  (fabula) of the lion, the wolf and the fox that hunt together: "lupus et vulpes se leoni associaverut in venatione" [it is not the fable by Aesop]. The fable has it moral interpatation (moraliter). 2.2. Full trust in Christ, who is like the ancor in the tempest. We must trust him completely for three reasons: «propter caritatem adoptionus, veritatem promissions et pietatem reddicionis» (48I). Interesting to note that here Christ is the father: «Nam Christus nos adoptavit et patrem nostrum se constituit». References to commentaries to the Pater noster and to the exemplum of the prodigal son [there was an established between Christ’s resurrection and this parable]. 2.3. Need to believe firmly, since only a faith well-rooted bears fruits. This means also a faith informed by love (fides formata by caritas), since also the devils and those in mortal sin have a faith without fruits (fides informis). This leads to a detailed passage on necromancy: necromancers and charmers (divinatores; carminatrices) are defined as heretics, since they associate with the demons. About the vetula (witches) and their believe in shapeshifting and nocturnal flight, the sermon quotes the canon episcopi, yet also recalling that they must be burn at stake and their goods sold out. The quaestio on the effectiveness of their practices (both in healing and harming) is due to the illusion of the devil. An exemplum about a old woman (vetula) who deceived a woman who asked her for help to change the attitude of her violent husband serves to prove that are scams and deceits. The vetula teaches the woman a spell during the night, while offering lard to the devil – the charms are in vernacular (German, macaronic). Third part Peter taking out his clothes and jumping into the water symbolizes that hope of the reward makes bear strains and pains in this world, as it is said with a direct exhortation: «Debemus expoliare cum Petro veterem hominem cum actibus suis et mittere in amaritudinem laboris virtutum et deo fideliter servire. Iuxta illud Deuteronomi 6: Dominus deum tuum adorabis et illi soli servies (Deuteronomy 6.13)” (48L). This biblical sentence serves as a sort of thema of this section, since it serves to explain «que domino nostro libenter servire debemus»: «Conditionis liberalioris dominus est. Dilectionis uberioris tuus est. Prelationis maioris solus deu est» (48M). 3.1. Only Jesus is the lord who can save the people (solus Iesus), others are only nominally lords, as showed by the exemplum of the philosopher who replied to the messengers of the king Philippus. 3.2. One has to serve Christ. How? As reply the sermon introduces the story of the pauper Guido sering the emperor and the long allegorical explanation (moraliter) of the services that Guido performed [the story comes from the Gesta romanorum, nr. 17 ed. Oesterley]. It depicts a demanding form of Christian life, since its starting point is when one is already pauper through prayer, fasting, almsgiving [note: this is particularly apt at the end of Lent], it includes frequent exam of conscience so to do twice a week a confession or contrition, it asks also the effort to set the example for other (somehow, a pastoral perspective). Finally, the perseverant memory of the Passion protects from any devilish attacks [also this is tuned to the liturgical period]. 3.3. The service to God needs to be put before anything else, since our good is all in that. Final prayer, with a direct appeal to God: «Esse enim sine te est sine deo esse, in maris periculo sine gubernatore, in carcere sine consolatore, in exilio sine amico, inter hostes sine adiutorio, in bello sine duce, in tenebris sine luce. Unde sine deo vivere est vivendo mori et decedere. Fac ergo, o domine Iesu, me semper vivere in te e sine te noli me derelinquere, ut cum dies advenerit mei clamoris, mea merces sis huius laboris ac virgo beatissima assit semper precata, ut Francisco cum (!) seraphico sempiterno fruar premio. Amen» [significant the reference to saint Francis at the end of the sermon collection]

Introduction Based on the thema, the simile between listening the word of God and a tent: “In sacra scriptura doctrine evangelice devote audite et auscultare tabernacula vocantur”. Soldiers build the tends for three reasons: “Et prima ratio est pre ardore solis et hoc causa refrigerandi. Secunda contra venti impetum pro securitate. Tertia contra pluvium protegendo” (f. r3v). Similarly, the doctrine of the Gospel, when listened carefully, protects from the ardent carnal passions (lust and greed), from the wind of temptations; from the deluge of worldly sin. Based of the discussion is Isaiah 4.6. Division based on the Gospel pericope Firts part Brief explanation of the pericope. It underlines how Elijah was not dead but was in Eden waiting for the time of his preaching against the Antichrist. It recalls that, according to Luke, Jesus discussed with him and Moses about his Passion and how it is determined by God’s overabundant mercy. Two secrets (secreta): why the transfiguration; why there are these three disciples and two saints from the Old Testament. In general, a valid number of witnesses was required. In specific, the three apostles were the closest to Jesus: Peter was already the pope (“erat iam papa constitutus”); James the future first martyr; John was elected to take care of the Virgin and the beloved disciple. Why Moses between the patriarchs, and why Elijah and not Enoch? “Questio est insoluta […] doctrinas varias”. Among the various opinions, Ferrer takes the one in which they were those who did 40 days of fasting, so the Christians (we) need to fast during Lent so to experience the transfiguration on Easter by means of holy communion (eucharist): “In quo clare patet quantum placet deo sacrum hoc ieiunium quadragesime. Ideo debemus ieiunare quadragesimam, et in die Pasche erimus in transfiguratione, scilicet communicando et poterimus dicere cum apostolo Paulo: Nos autem omnes revelata facie gloriam dei, speculantes in eadem imaginem transformamur a claritate in claritatem tanquam a domini spiritu (2 Cor 3). Nota hic quomodo Christus Moyses et Helyas ieiunaverunt quadragesimam”. Jesus did a Lent in prayer; Moses in listening (applied to mass and preaching): and Elijah walking (applied to go to church and to acquire indulgence). They set a clear example: “Sic nos ad instar Christi debemus vacare orantionibus […] Secundo ad instar Moysi audire missas, sermones […] Tercio ad instar Helye ambulare et ieiunare itinerado […] hoc est visitando ecclesias, quia in omnibus sunt multe indulgentie, et post ire ad vesperas et in posterum in pascha eritis digni habere gloriam paradisi” (f. r4rv). Second part The placid acceptance (placida acceptio) – implies of the Passion – since he already foretasted heaven. Peter suggested three tents thinking of coupling the people in this way: Moses and John; Elijah and James, Jesus and Peter. A quite developed semi-dramatic section that imagines Moses back to the limbo where he announces what has happen (and so, the upcoming liberation), while Elijah goes back to Eden and speaks with Enoch, who ask also why he was not invited, with the answer that insists again on fasting: “O, cur ego non ivi? O, cur ego non fui?”. Tunc potuisset respondere: Quia non ieiunasti”. Spiritual interpretation of why Jesus did not answer to Peter's request. If the Glossa says that it was an irrational question, Ferrer suggests a deeper meaning, namely that Peter was asking to enter into glory and what happens next indicates the five necessary stages of this journey: cloud = penance; voice of God = obedience; fall to the ground = fear; the approaching of Christ = the day of the final judgment (for this reason Christ tells them: "Surgite"); seeing Christ alone = only God is in full glory. Third part (extremely brief) Christ did not want the transfiguration to be revealed to the other apostles and disciples to avoid them to be even more scandalized by the sufferings of his Passion. However, Ferrer suggests that (“credo tamen...”) John was allowed to tell the Virgin about it [which source? Check the Meditationes Vitae Christi]

"De necessaria obligatione sacratissima communionis" Introduction frames the eucharist among the salvific tools provided by the divine providence, and says that having finhished to discuss about the sacrmaent of penance (again, underlining just contrition and confession, without space for satisfation), it is time to discuss about the eucharist by presenting three key points: the necessity (and so the obligation to it); the punishment for the omission; the preparation.    It annunces that only the first point will be discussed in this sermon, the others in the two following sermons.

The sermon contnues the plan annunced on the previous day by presenting the punishment for those who do not receive (properly) the eucharist - seven consequences, from the exclusion form the church to the damnation

Seven steps of a proper preparation to receive the eucharist

Introduction

True conversion only due to God’s direct intervention («Sine me, nihil potestis facere»; John 15.5). This is true for the whole humanity, which was as an hospital full of people sick of incurable diseases, «propter quod de studio paradisi venit ille magnus medicus practicare et infirmos curare». The same is true for each sinful soul. Since the topic is complex (subtilis), the preacher explains it with using a medical simile by pointing out the seven actions that a doctor performs: «Primo facies inspicitur Secundo pulsus tangitur Tertio urina attenditur Quarto dieta precipitur Quinto syropus immittitur Sexto purgatio tribuitur Septimo refectio conceditur» (f. o7r). - Development  - 1) Christ switches on the lamp of mercy and sheds light on the conscience (the face), so that one might know his/her sins. The example is that of the denial of Peter, who was called back by the crow of the rooster. The roster symbolises the preacher, since he shakes his wings (i.e. avoids sins and lives an exemplary life) and crows when the end of the night is close. 2) Checking the pulse = contrition. The five fingers of Christ’s hand are: fear, pain, loss, injury against God, angels and saints’ enmity. 3) Urine = confession, since it shows which is the illness: «Confessio est sicut urinale in quo urina peccatoris fetens ab interiori existens ostenditur confessori». The urinal needs to be clean, i.e. the confession needs to be clear and full. The confession must not expose the sins of other people (if the sin involves people that the priest might know, one needs to remain vague in the details), since one must «servare famam alterius in confessione». The confessor needs to be meek. 4) Diet = penance, which needs to fit with the specific sins.
5) Syrup = prayer, since it is sweet and one need to have it both on the morning and on the evening, mixed with warm water, i.e. with tears of repentance. 6) Purge = restitution and remission of injuries («non enim dimittitur peccatum nisi restituatur ablatum»). 7) Refection, after the purge one receives a light type of meat – in the penitential process this is the eucharist (yet, not before one performed the restitution!).

No introduction. The sermon is immediately divided in four parts derived from the Gospel pericope (see divisio above). - Most part of the sermon deals with the theme of the spiritual battle (see bibliography). In the last section (f. p6r) there is a description of the angels who serve Jesus, once he won over the devil’s temptations in the desert; they provide him with food since he is now hungry. The sermon follows what is found in the Meditationes vitae Christi (and perhaps other source) by saying: “Dicunt hic aliqui devoti contemplativi…”. It describes the angels who go to the Virgin Mary, taking her humble meal and food (“caules vel brodium vel spinargia et forte sardineta”) to bring it to Jesus, while she asks to bring her back at least the leftovers. It follows a moral interpretation about the condition of the faithful during Lent, as period of spiritual fight: “nam sumus in campo clauso, scilicet in quadragesima”, if one will resist until the end and win over temptations, there will be also for him/her the spiritual banquet, on Easter, when one is invited to have the Eucharist, i.e. the body of Christ that the Holy Spirit cooked “in coquina uteri virginalis” and that now is hidden under the veil of the Eucharist, “ideo dicit Christus: Vincenti dabo manna absconditum, quod nemo scit nisi qui accipit, Apoc. 2” (possible word play with Ferrer own name?)

Introduction Peter received this name after his confession of faith in Christ, which made him the foundation of the Church. The Church will not be wrong on faith and moral teaching necessary for salvation, yet it can be wrong on other things: "In aliis autem non pertinentibus ad fidem et falli et errare potet" (f. k4v). Three types of ecclesia: 1) the ecclesia malignantium (Psalm 1); 2) the militant Church, i.e. catholic, "non sicut latibula hereticorum"; 3) the triumphant Church. The sermon will deal with the second one. Division - First part The unity of the Church is proved in five ways: auctoritates; rationes; similitudines; revelationes; confutationes. The main emphasis is on the key concept that there is no salvation outside the Church (extra ecclesia nulla salus). Talking of the rationes, to explain the principle of non-contradiction, the sermon compares the different positions among religions (Jews and Islam - or rather: mahumetici and saracini), which cannot be both true. Only one is the true faith. And it points out that it is normal to persecute the religious dissent more than normal crime: “immo plus persequitur dissentientes quam fures et latrones” (f. k5v). As main simile, the sermon refers to the mystical body, with references to key passages of the apostle Paul. Interesting annotation on the fact that the body of the Church is in three places (world, purgatory, heaven), connecting them with the division of the host in three parts during the mass: the part put in the chalice symbolizes the soul already inebriated in heaven: “Sic christi corpus seu ecclesia est in triplici loco, scilicet in hoc mundo, in purgaotrio, et in celo. Ad quod significandum sacerdos in missa dividit corpus chirsti in tres partes. Per illam enim quam mittit in calice significat eos qui sunt in celo inebriati ab ubertate domus dei” (f. k5v). As revelation, the sermon briefly refers to an episode of the legend of saint Cecilia. - Key subsection With a new subdivision, the confutationes form the real body of the sermon, occupying half of the text. The confutation of mistakes is evidently crucial for this preacher. “Nam contra unitatem ecclesie sancte tres errores insurgunt: primus error est naturalium philosoforum; secundus est superborum et malorum christianorum; tertius est fere omnium paganorum” (f. k6r) Particularly developed is the confutation of the position of natural philosophers on the divine mercy that would save people in any religion/confession: “probare contendunt quod deus omnes homines ex sua bonitate salvat existentes in diversis ritibus et sectis”. The rebuttal insists on the necessary balance in God between mercy and justice. The third mistake contrasted is that not only of pagans but also of the most simple Christians, who are puzzled by the fact that God would save only those in one faith and condemn all the other nations: “Tertius error contra contra ecclesie sacre unitatem fere omnium paganorum et etiam simplicium christianorum dicitur error admirationis dicentium: ‘O quammirum esset si deus solummodo sub una fide existentes salvaret alias omnes nationes dannaret’” (f. k7r). The reply is based on the Gospel passages on the few who are saved (“multi sunt vocati, puaci vero electi”; Matthew 22:14) and the narrow and difficult road to the eternal life (Matthew 7:14) and that the people outside the Church have no excuses and one will get according to his/her merit. The final observation that half of the world is occupied by infidels introduces a long digression on the other half, occupied by ten groups (nationes) of Christians, yet only nominally: “Nam fere media hominum pars est infidelis. Sub nomine autem christiani quasi alia media pars est qua dividitur in decem nationes, scilicet Latinos, Grecos, Indios, Iacobitas, Nestorianos, Maronitas, Armenos, Georgianos, Surianos, Mozarabes” (f. k7rv). It follows a sort of geopolitics of faith, with a brief description of each groups, noting some characteristics of them – and generally condemning the non-Latin Christians all as heretics. Saying, for instance, that the Greeks are only nominally Christians, now under the political control of Turks - list of their three key theological errors: procession of the Holy Spirit; refuse of church of Rome as chief; purgatory. The Indians are those most numerous, and somehow favourably described (mentioning the practice of carrying two crosses in front of them when they go into battle). About the Jacobites, it is mentioned their practice of the circumcision and the impression of the sign of the cross on their front and body (“qui circunciduntur et baptizantur, cum ferro ignito caracterem crucis imprimunt in fronte et aliis partibus corporis ut in pectore vel brachiis"). After mentioning the Maronites (who are placed in Libya) and the Armenians (on the latter, notations on the singing of liturgy in their own language and , about the Georgians it is said that they are a strong people, in which also women are fighters (“et eorum femine utuntur armis sicut viri” – reference to Amazons?). The Syrians have the same positions of the Greeks against Latins. On the Mozarabs interesting notations on their liturgy: “Decima natio Mozarabes dicuntur quia modos christianorum de Arabia tenentur in multis et utuntur lingua latina in officiis divinis et obediunt ecclesie Rhomane, sed in multis discrepant, quia habent horas valde prolixas et faciunt tot horas divini officii quot sunt hore naturales diei cum hymnis et psalmis; et [est?] natio valde devota: in matrimonio non coniungunt nisi nationi sue gentis, inter quos femina amisso marito primo nunquam coniungit alteri” (f. k7v). While the description of the different nations of Christians reveals different degrees of sympathy, the final evaluation is extremely harsh: “Et isti omnes similiter cum infidelibus damnantur”. Taking the cue from the description of the different type of Christians, the sermon introduces a digression on their presence at the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem, where – a part the Observant Franciscans who have the proper custodia of the Sepulchre – there are eight type of heretics in a sort of Babylon of languages (“sunt octo diversa genera hereticorum diversas linguas habentium adeo quod nullus intelligit alium”). The section ends with a sorrowful address to the Church: “O igitur sancta ecclesia unica sponsa Christi! O Sancti Spiritus congregatio gratiosa/ [...] O quam multi sunt in te solo nomine et extra te ipsa re [...] Ergo hi ibunt in infernum, ubi nullus ordo est sed sempiternus horror inhabitat ubi cruciabuntur in secula seculorum” (f. k8r). - Second part The power of the Church (potestas) is connected with the image of the keys, which rapidly becomes a discourse on the potestas ordinis of the priesthood, since priests have the following powers: to forgive sin; to change the pains (from those of purgatory to satisfaction); to consecrate the Eucharist; excommunication; holy orders; indulgence (this only the pope) – which however require to be ready to receive it. This section ends again with an address to the Church and a treat agains sinners: “O potestas ecclesie spiritualis quam magna es...” (f. k8r)