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).