Introduction Shared responsibility of Judas and the Jews in the death of Jesus («concurrebant isti, scilicet Judas vendendo et Iudei emendo»; f. v7v) and postillatio of Psalm 108, with the topos of the Jewish blindness as infidels and their (eternal) condemnation («non intrent in iusticia tua, deleantur de libro viventium»).
Divisio
First part: beside emphatic passages that commemorate the Passion of Christ (e.g. «Impi vero iudei nedum illam divinam Christi personam vituperaverunt blasphemando, verumetiam ledendo, percutiendo, irridendo, accusando false et insuper occidi procurando. O peccatum grande. O peccatum enorme, delictum grave, percutere deum vivum, ligare, trahere, vituperare...»; f. v8v) but also the hypothesis of what would happen if Judas and the Jews did not betray Jesus: the preacher opts for the necessity of his death for the redemption (against those who state that Jesus’ readiness was enough) and imagine that Jesus would have asked Peter or even to the Virgin Mary to crucify him (in the latter case, as re-enactment of the sacrifice of Abraham and Isaac). [It’s a passage (f. x1r) – the same dramatic reasoning is used also on Good Friday (sermon 62)]. Continuing in the same emotional tone, the sermon quotes at length the impropreria of the Good Friday liturgy against the Jews’ ingratitude («O divinorum beneficiorum ingratissimi, vobis improperat omnis mundus, contra te clamat ecclesiasticus sacer chorus in persona Christi dicens: Popule meus quid feci tibi...», example of anti-Judaism rhetoric). Finally, the sermon discuss how Judas and the Jews sinned against the Holy Spirit, presenting the six type of sin against the Holy Spirit. Second part: shorter than the first one; punishment of the Jews is triple: spiritual, judicial, corporal. The most interesting section is that about the «pena iudiciali», where the sermon quotes at length the legal norms (mainly from canon law) about the Jews. The part on the corporal pain first discusses Jesus’s prophecy of the destruction of Jerusalem (Matthew 23 and Luke 19, on the basis of Nicholas of Lyra) and then it presents its events in detail on the basis of Flavius Josephus, before reasserting the rightness of this Divine punishment divine punishment: «Iuste ergo iuste deus illos exterminari permisisti» (f. x3v).

"In die parasceves devotissimus modus passionis domini nostri Iesu Christi contemplandus in quatuor viis cum utilibus questionibus". Introduction Ample introduction, which immediately underlines the duty of compassion and of weeping on Good Friday, as it will prove that one is a real Christian – a theme recurrent along the sermon which insist on the need for the preacher to move the audience and for the listeners to be moved by the Passion: «ido ipsam [Passionem] tenemur singuli qui sumus fideles adulti diligenter devote et lachrymabiliter sub pena eterne damnationis attendere» (f. H6r). This is proven in four points, namely ¬autoritates, rationes, similitudines, exempla. At the end of the first point, the preachers imagines Christ who addresses directly the human soul and who states that the Good Friday sermon serves to discern who is a true Christian (i.e. a limb of his body), since s/he will weep: «Attende bene quis ego sum et vide que patior et meam passionem fac tuam per compassionem et fletum. Id circo enim in hac die predicare facio meam acerbam passionem ut videam qui sunt membra mea, illi profecto qui sentiunt per compassionem, illi vero sunt alieni qui non dolent ergo nec curant flere» (f. H6v). On the basis of Nicholas of Lyra the body metaphor is then applied to the different groups in the Church. The salvific effect of the Passion needs to be welcomed by compassion and love (« per dilectione et compassione»), since: «ille qui illi non compatitur, dannabitur»; f. H7r). Imediately is presented as best exemplum the Virgin Mary, who was most sorrowful during the Passion (the key events are immediately listed) – she serves as emotional ‘spur’ for the faithful. Brief reference to the common place of the impossibility to pray the Ave Maria on the Good Friday – and so the need to turn towards the cross, using the hymn O crux ave (f. H7v).  Sermon body The sermon is organized around four routes (viae) of the Passion, which mark the chronological order of the Passion: «Et ideo charissimi salvatoris mundi discipuli et illius veri filii per quatour vias attendamus hodie et videamus redemptoris nostri maximum dolorem...» (f. H7v). 1: from Bethania to Jerusalem 2: to the Gethsemane 3: return as prisoner to the city 4: to the place of crucifixion. Each part is introduced by three theological questions (quaestiones) on the Passion (e.g. its necessity, role of God the Father, how pain and joy cohexisted in Christ during the Passion, whether it is the supreme pain ...), followed by a quite plain postillatio of the Passion narrative (harmonizing the four Gospels, with references mainly to Nicholas of Lyra), which includes several emotional addresses to the audience and/or dramatic description of the reaction of the Virgin Mary and the other characters of the Passion. Part one. Noteworthy the passage about what would have happened if Judas and the Jews did not betray Christ, with the hypothesis – presented in a moving way, with direct dialogues – that Jesus would have asked Peter or the Virgin Mary to crucify him [same reasoning in sermon 39] (f. I1r). Ample description of the last ‘private’ meeting of Jesus and the Virgin before his Passion, a very emotional and affective tone (full of kissing and weeping) in this direct dialogue between the two characters (Laskai is careful to state that this is an hypothetical reconstruction). Reference to Bonaventure. (f. I2v-I3r) Here and elsewhere addresses to the faithful soul to contemplate and see the Passion: «O anima mea, anima mea, vide quomodo filius benedicit matrem, et quomodo mater ad mortem licentiat filium. Vide inquam quam copiose flent discipuli, quam pie lachrymantur sancte muliere...» (f. I3r). This kind of address is also used to summarize each section. Part two. The sermon imagines the dialogue between Christ and the angel in the garden (f. I5v), and first description of the sufferings of Christ after his capture, with an emphatic address to the human soul, who is invited to address the Virgin Mary and to go in spirit to the places of the Passion so to gather the hairs of Jesus: «O lachrymandum negotium. O opus cruentis stupendum [...]. O anima christiana, quid audis? Quid cogitas? [...]. Vade igitur anima devota ad locum captivationis Christi saltem in spiritu, et te prosterne ibidem illi gratias agendo et evulsos crines et barbam sanctam recolligendo devotissime» (f. I6v). Part three opens with the descriuption of the diciples divided in groups who cry for Jesus' capture. Very emotional description of the announcement of Jesus capture by John the apostle to the Virgin Mary, with a detailed scene of collective weeping that involve Mary Magdalene, Martha and Lazarus of Bethania. The texts – in the direct discourse - simulates the speaking and weeping together with the anaphoric and pathetic use of heu. It finishes with the invitation to the audience to associate to this group of disciples, who moves towards Jerusalem in search of Jesus: «Ideo associa te mentaliter ad comitivam illius et cum ea attende et vide si est dolor...» (f. I8v), with the repetition of the thema that dots the sermon. Hence, the prosecution of the narrative of the Passion, although presented in a quite plain way, is supposed to happen in front of a special group of viewers/witnesses among which the listeners have been invited to stay.The emphatic tone returns at the end of the section, with the flagellation, with a renewed invitation to compassion and mental participation to the Passion (f. K2r). In comparison, references to the Jews’ responsibility is quite brief and plain. Part four. Christ on the cross as book that teaches all the virtues and distinction between Old testament figurae and he as veritas et identitas (f. K2v). Empathic description of the crucifixion, underling the point of view of the Virgin Mary and the appeal to the faithful to compassion. There is an insistence on the visual language (f. K3v). Yet, it seems that the sermon has to proceed quickly in this section, since – for instance – there is no elaboration on Jesus last words, yet just a brief expansion of with a discourse of Mary to his son on the cross. The sermon closes with a brief but vivid and graphic description of the mourning of the Virgin Mary and the disciples on the death body of Christ, the repetition of the thema and a final exhortation to compassion, with the exhortation to a final collective cry («cum grandi clamore et fletu magno dicamus sic: Christe fili dei vivi, miserere nobis [...]. Tandem unanimiter alta voce dicamus: Iesus, Iesus, Iesus!» (f. K4v).

Introduction As Aristotle says, wonder is the beginning of philosophy («Quia homines propter admirari inceperunt philosophari»; 5T), the same happens to the Jews during the exodus in front of the manna and to the citizens of Jerusalem at the arrival of Jesus (cfr. thema). Which is the most astonishing visible thing done by God? Three possible answers: creation; mercy towards sinners, which let them live and repent in this world; incarnation. The latter is clearly the answer chosen by the sermon and it is developed by quoting and commenting upon the first verses of Dante’s prayer to the Virgin Mary (Commedia, Paradiso, 33,1-9 – in Latin) [Dante is not mentioned but presented as «quidam sapiens» and «poeta» - poets]. The admired contemplation of the prodigy of the incarnation must move to love God so to reply to the question of the thema with the profession of faith. Division [Its introduction concerns only the second of the three parts] First part In the entrance to Jerusalem, Jesus is revealed as saviour of the humanity (connection with the singing of the Hosanna). Direct prayer directed towards Jesus, who is acknowledged as: «potens es ad liberandum promptus es ad adiuvandum clemens es ad indulgendum» (6A). 1.1. Doctrine of the redemption («solus Iesus»), according to Anselm (Cur deus homo). It is introduced the story of Codrus, king of Athens, which is interpreted as an allegory of Christ’s voluntary incarnation and sacrifice for the salvation of the militant Church. [All the section depends on Robert Holcot]  1.2. The affirmation that Christ was ready to help the humanity prompts the explanation of why the incarnation did not occur earlier. 1.3. Christ’s mercy asks to discuss whether God wants to save everybody and what does it mean exactly. The sermon relies on Nicholas of Lyra triple explanation of 1 Timothy 2.3 and argues for a balance between mercy and justice. This leads to the quaestio whether the damned are more then the saved. The reply is built again on Augustine and Anselm - with the addition of Franciscan theologians, namely François de Meyronnes and Bonaventure. Interesting the remark on the salvation of non-Christian, which is imagined through the grace  of a sudden and complete repentance at the moment of their death  («Volunt etiam multi doctores quod deus multis gentilibus virtutes excellentibus hanc faciat gratiam ut unum gemitum emittant et malorum actuum recognitionem et quod sic eorum extremam penitentiam acceptet»; 6F). Yet, it remains that the damned are more than the saved. Second part The expulsion of the merchants and money changers from the temple, highlight that opposite things cannot coexist. The scene is symbol of the expulsion of the «nogotiatores de ecclesia». The discourse turns to the actual merchants and their sins, which open with a quite radical opening sentence («Mercator nunquam potet placere deo»), since they are usually fraudulent in in their work, particularly in three ways: «Species diversas comiscendo Pondera et mensura variando. Defectus et rerum fracturas celando» (6H). The sermon presents a series of situations and frauds common at the marketplace (including also frauds committed by buyers). Noteworthy: a positive reference to alchemy; description of adulterations of wine, with terminology given in German [macaronic / vernacular]; Beda’s description of a vision of saint Fursey, who sees three symbolic fires that represents the inextinguishable corruption prompted by merchants to all the world: falsity, greed, impiety. [Use of a quite old source to discuss about economic ethics - yet it is readapted to target the merchants]. Third part Jesus teaches to separate oneself from the evil people, this must be done – on a moral level – through three transitions: «De rebellione ad reconciliationem De dissolutione ad religionem De peregrinatione ad quietationem» (6N). The first is the transition from sin to grace through penance, since Christ welcomes in his kingdom those who come back. Second, the entrance in the religious life, which is reserved to the most promising (image of the plants that are put in the viridarium so that they can produce more fruit) – the sermon discusses the simile between religious life and the vineyard, yet underlining that the transition must be complete, i.e. the roots must be planted there and not left in the world. It follows a brief quaestio on the superiority of the religious life on the secular life (again a reference to Anselm, to point out that the difference is between giving a fruit or giving the entire tree). The third transition is from this world to heaven, answering why God does not call people there while they are still completely innocent, i.e. as kids. The end of the sermon emphasise that God is ready to kindle the fire of charity and penance, as said by Revelation 3.15 and shown by Peter’s conversion.

Introduction  The introduction sets up the tone of the sermon by linking Muhammad with the Apocalyptic beasts on the basis of Nicholas of Lyra’s exegesis, while on the same time starting to develop the semantic field of the bestiality as connected with immoral, carnal, worldly behaviours. Interesting also the transition from the Greeks to Muslims, and the mention of Turks (i.e. the actual historical adversary). «Charissimi audivimus rebellionem grecorum contra fidem rectam Rhomane ecclesie et illius lachrymosam ruinam propter ipsius superbiam. Nunc restat declarandum non minus lugubrem turcorum exaltatam perfidiam, de qua ad litteram secundum Nicolaum de Lyra intelligitur illud thema: Vidi aliam bestiam, scilicet Mahumetum vitam voluptuosam et bestialem ducentem, nam fuit luxuriosus super omnes hiomines orientales, ascendentem de terra, quia per mercantias et rapinas de paupertate ascendit ad divitias, et habebat coruna duo similia agni, id est Christi. Hec cornua sunt prophetia et legis nove latio; finxit enim Mahumetus maledictus se esse prophetam et legis divine latorem [...] et loquebatur sicut draco, scilicet astute, mendacite et dolose. Nihilominus tamen omnipotens deus tanta mala fieri permittit ad utilitatem electorum suorum...» (f. q4r). First part After a short section on bestiality according to scriptura and ratio, the main part is the attack against Muhammad on the basis of history  (resgesta). Laskai outlines his sources at the beginning: Speculum historiale by Vincent of Beauvais, Jacobus de Voragine, Antoninus' Chronicon (f. q4v). It follows a detailed and tendentious presentation of the life of Muhammad, which hands with the accusation that he and his followers joined any kind of lust «hominibus libidinis et voluptatis frema omnia relaxavit [...] O brutalis vita [...] Cur o Mahumet te et tecum tot homines damnasti? [...] Cur istam vitam contra naturam non spernitis? Ideo quippe quia delectatione carnis excecati estis» (f. q5v). Second part The basis of any Muslim mistake is that they do not recognize the divinity of Christ but consider him only as a prophet. It follows a detailed rebuttal of this position demonstration also contrasting the miracles that Christ continues to perform in contrast with Muhammad (again, several references to Vincent of Beauvais. The sermon ends with a final emphatic address: «O igitur vos saraceni turpiter decepti. O turci dannabiliter erroribus involuti [...] Considerate...» (f. q7v).

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.