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]

The sermon teaches to the laity how they have to behave in the temple of God, i.e. in the church on Sunday and the main feasts. This means the seven conditions to partecipate fruitfully to the mass [note that the introduction highlights listening]. They are derived from the exegesis of Psalm 99.

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]

Introduction Ferrer builds a link with the topics of the previous Sunday: that on fasting, on prayer: “intentio est universalis ecclesie fideles homines ad orationem provocare”. Since each person lives a perennial conflict between flesh and spirit, the Church knows about this controversy and that the soul is right, so it first aims to restrain flesh with fasting and then to exalt the soul with prayer. While in the first Sunday the example of Jesus provoked to fasting, that of the woman of Canaan provokes now to prayer. Division The three key point are linked with the thema yet Ferrer immediately overturn that option (as if it were too intellectual...) and just follow the narrative of the pericope: “Sed de his intricationibus non curo! Sed ego volo ista tria trahere ex evangelio et non ex themate” (f. s1r). First part The sermon expands on the biblical narrative, with interesting development of the woman’s invocation (almost a model of prayer). Two analytical points (one theoretical, the other moral) 1) Why Jesus was called son of David? David expelled the devils from Saul by playing the chitara, not for the power of music but since it was figura of the cross of Christ, made with dried wood (reference to previous sermon 3/6/16: “ut pridie dixi in primo sermone cuius thema: Ecce sanus factus etc’) – symbolism developed: “Et ista cithara significant crucem et funicular significant membra Christi que fuerunt attracta in cruce et nervi cum clavis. Et clavelle ille significant clavos…” (f. s1r). The cithara produce high notes, so Christ on the cross did – reference to Jesus’ seven last words and their meaning.  2) A moral teaching: the woman’s daughter was tormented in several ways by demons, who are connected with the seven capital sins [once again]. Detailed exhortation not to recur to divination (sortilegos), with specific references to those who had lost something and to women who want to have kids. Second part   Jesus refused three times, yet the woman insisted. Also this time, the sermon details two points, one theoretical and the other moral. 1) Christ redeemed everybody with his Passion, yet not each one is saved since s/he did not want to do fasting: “quia nolunt ieiunare” [note the insistence on it, and also the exaggeration]. This is explained with a detailed simile of a rich man who went to among Saracens to redeem Christians slaves (“redimendum christianos captivos omnes qui essent penes sarracenorum in Barbaria cum magnis pencuniis”); if some of them did not want to leave after being set free, it is not his fault. In the same way the Passion “solvendo in ara crucis” frees everybody and invites all to embark on the ship that symbolize the Church (“nunciatur dicendo: ponatis vos in navigio ecclesie”). Yet, on this salvific ship the Jews did not want to embark as well as Tartars and Saracens who believe in the heaven promised by Muhammad: “Nam venerunt nuncii domini et dixerunt iudeis: venite ad navem domini. Qui dixerunt: nolumus. Similiter dicatur de tartaris et saracenis, qui dicunt quod noster propheta promittit nobis in alio mundo rivum melis et lactis” (f. s2r). 2) The moral teaching concerns learning to pray in the morning and in the evening. This is presented by means of an exemplum of a Lombard man (“Quidam lombardus...”) who decided to go to Jerusalem: during the pilgrimage, he prays everyday to ask that his journey goes well; yet, once he is almost back home, he forgets to pray and his house burn down with his wife and son inside it. Third part Why did Jesus make the woman wait and did not listen to her immediately? Two points: 1) Waiting makes the woman grow and elevate so that she obtains more at the end, so the behavior of Jesus was ruled by love. Explained with the exemplum (labeled as parable) of a soldier (miles) who asks his king for an apple: the king gives him first a castle, then a horse, then a robe, and only at the end an apple... 2) This was done to give an example of humility for us

Introduction The sermon opens by presenting the duty that parents have towards their children and exposing the cases in which a father can legitimately disinherit his son. The detailed list of seven cases is a vademecum on matters of inheritance (e.g. filial violence against his father, sexual intercourse with his mother or his father’s concubine, attempts to prevent the father from making a testament; do not care to set his father free from prison) serves to point out that the initial request of the prodigal son was legitimate. The sermon next presents three quaestiones that revolve around the restoration of the sinner after penance, with specific attention to the issue «whether the deeds that were alive through charity and mortified by sin will live again through penance» («Queritur tercio an opera per caritatem viva et mortificata ex peccato per penitentiam reviviscant»; 16R), underlining also the positive effects of the good works that one does in the condition of mortal sin. Drawing on Bonaventure, the sermon insists on the importance that one – even in mortal sin – should not desist from doing good because God will find the right way to remunerate him/her with his grace. Main division (see above) First part Far from God, the human being cannot have rest (reference to the Confessiones of Augustine: «my heart is restless until it would come to you, God» (Inquietum est cor meum donec veniat ad te; 16V). Hence, the sinner must return to the house of the Father (God), i.e. the church, where he will find also his mother, i.e. the Virgin Mary: “Through penitence, the sinner must return to the house of God the Father, which is the holy Church, where he will be safe from all his enemies. There he will find a graceful father and a mother, who is the glorious and clement Virgin May, because she welcomes those who seek refuge in the womb of her mercy, she protects them from all enemies, and she nourishes them with the milk of grace” («Debet ergo peccator redire ad domum dei patris, scilicet sanctam ecclesiam, in qua securatur ab omnibus adversariis, et hoc per penitentiam, et inveniet patrem graciosum, matrem scilicet virginem gloriosam clementem, que refugientes ad gremium sue misericordie suscipit et ab hostibus defendit et lacte gracie nutrit»; 16X). It follows a long digression on the Virgin who, as a mother, fosters the return of the sinners (the texts build upon several quotations of Anselm and Bernard of Clairvaux). Second part The fruitful return of the penitent to the state of grace («fructuosa reversio penitentisa ad statum gracie»; 17B). Sinners are invited to identify with the prodigal son: «the sinner is far away and separated from God and, in the same way of this prodigus, he must come to himself and think of his actual extreme misery and the great mercy of God the Father; he must lament and not rest until he will come to the father of mercy, God of full consolation» («Moraliter peccator, longe a deo divisus et separatus, debet instar huius prodigi per conversionem in se reverti, pensare propriam miseriam et inopiam et dei patris maximam pietatem, dolere et non quiescere donec ad eum veniat, qui est pater misericordiam et deus totius consolationis»). This exhortation to imitate the prodigal son is reiterated, in a process that involves heart, mouth and action («Ad hunc patrem pium et benignum debet peccator ad instar filii prodigi: in corde recurrere ad eius benignitatem; in ore proponere propriam iniquitatem; in opere intendere satisfactionis humilitatem»; 17C). This threefold division is connected with the three parts of penitence: contrition, confession, and satisfaction. The first point puts on the forefront not the memory of the sins but of the benefits received from God. This positive memory of God’s mercy is the starting point for the conversion, yet, mercy cannot be separated from justice. The listeners have to recall that God will punish those who do not convert from their sin, even though this goes against his merciful nature (17D). Dealing with confession, the sermon provides the listeners with a formulary to start an oral confession. Next, it considers the relationship between contrition and confession. Why is outward confession necessary? Is «contrition and confession of the heart» not sufficient? Per se, the contrition joined with the intention to confess and provide satisfaction as soon as possible already purifies the sinner. Later on, if he/she does not confess and satisfy, the previous sin cannot return. However, in that event he/she commits a new mortal sin by breaking the Church commandments (17E). Yet, if through contrition God already cancels the sin, what effect has confession? The sermon states that – since each sin is «against both God and the Church» – there is an ecclesiastical/social dimension of sin that, consequently, needs an ecclesiastical reconciliation «through confession, imposed satisfaction and the priest’s absolution» (Dum enim peccator peccat mortaliter, peccat contra deum et ecclesiam. […] peccat contra ecclesiam quam contemnit et scandalisat, et ligatur altero vinculo, quod solum per confessionem et satisfactionem iniunctam et absolucionem presbiteri ydonei relaxatus»; 17.F). Moreover, aural confession is necessary to tackle the problem of rightly establishing the measure of satisfaction: to solve it, God appointed the priest as arbiter and gave him the power to evaluate and impose penances (potentia arbitrandi et taxandi). Third part The final part deals with the amorosa receptio patris. It opens with a complex exemplum taken from the Gesta Romanorum (the story of the son of Alexander the Great, who revolted against his father – a story whose moral interpretation was already based on the parable of the prodigal son). The reaction of the father of the parable points out that God goes to the penitent rapidly (velociter), embraces him sweetly (dulciter), and dresses him nobly (nobiliter). Here, the sermon discusses prevenient grace and its accord with the human responsibility in the process of conversion. Grace is compared with the sun that shines but illuminates only those who open the doors, or with the indulgence that the pope offers to everybody but that are acquired only by those who go to Rome (17N). In the text, remains some tension between the free gift of God and human initiative, whose importance is clearly outlined by emphasising the importance of the first step taken by the prodigal son: «The father would not have come to the prodigal son along the way, if the son had not said before: I will rise and go to the father» («Non enim pater prodigo venisset obviam penitenti, si non prius dixisset: Surgam et ibo ad patrem»; 17N). Still, the sermon clarifies that it is not the penitent’s action that provokes and obtains grace, which remains a gift that is given «after this disposition but not because of this disposition» («post quam [contritionem] non propter quam deus vult dare gratiam»; 17N). Next, it turns to the spiritual theme of the love relationship between God and the soul [spiritual marriage]. The kissing of the father is connected with the kisses mentioned in the Song of Songs and opens the way for a first person discourse of the beloved soul: «The embrace and the kisses are signs of peace and love. […] The soul, bride of Christ, habitually longs for this greatly blessed and mostly beloved kiss; she longs with great desire and frequent sighs and repeats with the Song of Songs: Let him kiss me with kisses of his mouth (1,1), so that she could rejoice and be delighted. As if the soul would say: ‘My mostly beloved groom Jesus, for whose love I am languishing, might give me those grace and mercy that I am longing for with the whole depths of my heart, and might comfort me with the sweetness of his piety and of his divine benediction, so that I could return to life’» («Nam amplexus and oscula sunt signa pacis et amoris. […] Isto osculo superbenedicto et amantissimo magno desiderio et frequenti suspirio anima sponsa Christi appetere solet, et ut iocundetur et letetur dicere illud Cantico 1: Osculetur me osculo oris sui, quasi dicat: ‘Amantissimus sponsus meus Iesus, in cuius amore langueo, immittat mihi gratiam et misercordiam quam totis visceribus cordis desidero et confortet me dulcedine sue pietatis et divine benedictionis et reviviscam’»; 17O).  Playing on the contrast between the two brothers within the parable, the sermon then introduces a final question: whether God loves more the sinner who does penitence than the righteous person who has always been so («queritur an deus plus diligit peccatorem penitentem quam iustum semper benefacientem»; 17R). The discriminating factor is the fervour, so a penitent can surpass a righteous person (examples are Mary Magdalene and Paul). The elder brother of the parable symbolises those who are righteous but tepid (cf. Revelation 3,15). Still, this is not the rule. The sentence of the Gospel that «there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous people who have no need of repentance» (Luke 15,7) applies only to few special cases, while the supreme joy of heaven is indeed reserved for those who did not need to convert, first of all the Virgin Mary and John the Baptist.

Introduction Craftsmanship (ars) fixes the defects of nature (candle, stairway, ship...). There are three periods in history: ante legem, sub legem, tempus gratie. The law is like a craftsmanship (ars) that corrects the defects of [postlapsarian] nature and a figure of grace. References to the thema: Christ comes in the latest phase of history and the ship connects first with the Virgin Mary (allegory) and then with penance (moral interpretation): “vel navis designat penitentiam que nos de periculis mundi in sero huius temporis potest deducere ad portum salutis” (3K). - Two quaestiones (quaestio), connected with the two interpretations. Access to divine mercy. Christ is the source, yet the Virgin Mary is “quasi singularem imperatircem”. On the cross, Christ entrusted John to his mother, she is the only one who kept the faith, so to her he entrusted the Church (i.e. the ship): “ideo nunc habeas curam de ea cum filio quem tibi committo, ut navis ecclesie tua misericordia gubernetur” (3L). The divine mercy is received in the Church, through the Virgin. Is penance in extremis salvific? Penance needs to be true, that in extremis is risky since free will and deliberate conscience can be absent: “debet esse voluntaria et propter deum”, while there is the risk that it is motivated only by fear of eternal pain (“propter timorem pene”). It is also difficult to change nature (as an Ethiopian or a leopard do not change colour...). Yet, true penance is always salvific, also at the last moment (exemplum of Manasseh, 2 Chronicles 33). During this life, nobody should despair – but for this reason, no one has to postpone repentance. - Divisio  - First part  Necessity to watch (symbolized by the disciples working during the night on the boat) to protect oneself from the persecutor, i.e. the devil. Four vigils during the night symbolize different types of good works connected with different symbolic birds: first, the works of contrition and penance - brief discussion on confession, with the exemplum of the peacock; second, works of sanctification (comparison with the sparrow); third, works of compassion and mercy (associated with the crane); works of devotion (Ego dormio et cor meum vigilat; Ct 5), is the contemplation, exemplified by the nightingale (philomena). - Second part Importance of the presence of Christ, pilot (gubernator) of ship that has to cross the dangerous sea of this world. In the Gospel, he invites to trust him: Confidite, ego sum, nolite timere”. Three types of people need to trust him. incipientes quos informat ne pereant proficientes quis confortat ut compleant perfecti quos conservat ut permaneant [3S] 2.1. The beginners are those who begins the penance by putting the boat on the sea. Yet, as soon as one wants to make penitence, he is assaulted by pirates, symbol of pleasure (“obviat pyrata infernalis vento voluptatis”): depending on his character, they cause bad thoughts, stop him, capture him (3S). Long exemplum of Ulysses and Circe, referring to Boethius. In the moral interpretation, the transformation in beasts is connected with social sins, while Ulysses symbolizes the person who wins through the power of reason and by smelling the flower given to him by the queen of Troy - i.e. Christ which is given to a person by the Virgin Mary - and begins to do penance (3T). 2.2. Those half way are in the middle of the ocean and can be affected by sloth, lose the initial energy and relax too much, thinking that is natural to eat, drink, sleep, and make themselves comfortable – i.e. a relaxation in the ascetic effort. Sloth and laziness are the wind against, which is sent by the devil. Reference to the fable of the sirens mentioned by poets (“de quo in fabulis poetarum recitatur..”; 3V]), first in general, and then in connection with Ulysses “ut recitat Alexander in cincillario poesis” (?). Interpretation: syrens (the devil) want to move someone away from the commitment to navigation; Ulysses closing the ears of his fellows means to control the five senses; the mast of the ship is the Cross (3X). 2.3. The perfect people must be careful, since the perils increase getting close to the port, particularly the storms. Particularly dangerous is the spiritual pride and the poison of vainglory as well as to trust in oneself and in its merits (merit), for instance by recalling the good works done, while instead one has to trust only in Christ. The nautical imagery is prolonged with the story of the sea monster that becomes like a island, on which the sailors land, tying their ship to it and when they kindle a fire to cook, the monster awakes and sinks dragging them with itself. The monster symbolizes the world, due to its instability (instabilitas) and its being covered in mud by sins; the perfecti sometime stop to worry about the world, trust to much in themselves, and are suddenly overwhelmed by it (3Y). - Third part Miracles of Christ and his curative nature (he is compared with plants such as the pomegranate and with gems). In the Gospel, the people is cured by touching his garment. He has a triple garment (symbolism of clothes): 3.1. Purplish (purpurea), symbolo of the blood of his Passion - several biblical references – which can be touched by means of meditation. 3.2. Golden, i.e. the splendour of his virtues, which can be touched through imitation (imitatio). 3.3. The third garment of Christ was the womb of the Virgin Mary, which is ‘multicolour’: “istud vestimentum est stragulatum, vulgariter: gestryffelt” [note the vernacular expression]. Biblical reference: “Stragulatam vestem fecit sibi; bissus et purpura indumentum eius” (Proverbs 31:22). This leads to a Marian ending of the sermon, where each colour of the womb is connected with a virtue: plauenus = patience (which needs to be lined with joy: “istud vestimentum nihil valet nisi infuteratum, illa fuderatura est letitia ut leta sit patientia”; 3Z); candid = virginity; purplish = love (caritas)

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)