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).

References also to classics' view of the underworld (Virgil and Seneca). The topics of prayer and mass (for the souls) are also addressed.

Introduction While God prefers to use mercy rather than punishment with human beings, human beings often become angry for trivial reasons.
Divisio (see above) 1) First part: physiology of wrath: ira est accensio sanguinis circa cor ex vaporatione collere, vel felis (quote from John of Damascus). Three types of wrath: 1. “Natural” wrath (i.e. wrath due to personal temperament; not a sin, because it is like other natural defects such as hunger, thirst, sleep); 2. Wrath in judgment (i.e. «zeal for justice», not a sin); 3. «Ira… fundata ne l’appetitto sensitivo»; not a sin if regulated by reason and good judgment (exemplum: Jesus get angry with the merchants and the money changers in the Temple; «getting angry for truth and justice is an act of magnificence», reference to Aristotle); a mortal sin if not regulated by reason. 2) Second part: six causes of wrath (reference to Seneca's De ira): 1. Human nature (i.e. personal temperament; the disposition to anger depends on the amount of bile in the body); 2. Wine (because it slightly warms the blood; legend of Noah who waters the vine with the blood of a lion, a pig and a monkey; 3. Excessive delicacy in education (like «mules and horses: when they have been in the stable for two or three months, fed with fodder and spelt, they kick at their owner, bite and don’t let themselves be tamed»); 4. Desire for power (exemplum from Valerius Maximus); 5. Excessive commitments; 6. Infirmity. 3) Third part: wrath causes three serious harms to human beings: 1. Deprivation of reason and good judgment («The law sees the wrathful, but the wrathful doesn’t see the law» = Lex videt iratum, iratus legem non videt, quote from Publilius Syrus [not mentioned]; Ira impedit animum ne possit cernere verum, quote from Cato?); exemplum: Theodosius and Ambrose (Saint) in Milan; 2. Hatred of self, others and God; 3. Desperation and shorter life.
Conclusion Mention of the death of Hercules who, desperate and enraged due to his illness, threw himself into the fire (reference to Jerome’s Chronicon). Exhortation to avoid wrath, because beati mites, quia ipsi possidebunt terram… beati pacifici, quoniam filii Dei vocabantur (quote from Matthew 5, 4; 5, 9).

Introduction Interpretation of the thema: the Samaritan woman is the reasonable soul who, being in sin, asks to haurire aquam, that is, to receive grace.
Divisio (see above) 1) First part: three definitions of “sin”: 1. “sin is deprivation of human goodness” (reference to Bonaventure, Commentaria in quattuor libros sententiarum Magistri Petri Lombardi, II); cf. Peccatum est carentia boni ubi debet esse (quote from Augustine’s De civitate Dei); according to Bonaventure, God has given human beings three supremely necessary goods: 1) “mesure” (i.e. desire nothing against the divine will; «sin has perverted this order, because now the human heart always desires and thinks evil, i.e. carnality and sensuality»); 2) “beauty” (the true beauty and nobility of the human being is the virtue; reference to Seneca [probably to Epistulae ad Lucilium, LXXVI]); 3) order (i.e. directing thoughts, actions and words to God; sin diverts our operations from God). So, “sin is deprivation of beauty, order and measure” (reference to Augustine). 2. “Sin is separation from what is according to nature and conversion to what is against nature” (reference to John of Damascus); as the sick person, whose nature is vitiated by illness, desires harmful things more than healthy things, so the sinner despises virtue and loves vices. 3. “Peccatum est, bono incommutabili [i.e. God] spreto, adherere bono commutabili [i.e. the human being]” (quote from Augustine's De libero arbitrio). 2) Second part: two operations of sin: 1. “Peccatum est prevaricatio divine legis et celestium inobedentia mandatorum” (quote from Ambrose (Saint), De Paradiso); three main laws: 1) “natural law”; 2) “law of Scripture” (i.e. the law given by God to Moses); 3) “law of grace” (i.e. the gospel of Christ, perfection of all laws). Sin is prevarication of all these laws (several biblical exempla for each law). 2. “expolation of virtue”, because sin is against human nature (“Everything that does not please God is against nature” [reference to Bernard of Clairvaux]), while virtue is according to it.
Conclusion Invitation to avoid sin, even at the cost of losing one's home, relatives and everything else (direct appeal to the preacher to rebuke «friars, priests, monks, merchants, gentlemen, widows and maidens who offend God for a penny»).

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].  -