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).

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 original sin passes from Adam and Eve to the whole humanity as it happens for the sons born in slavery. On that, the progenitors of the humanity were bad merchants (“mali mercatores fuerunt”). After the redemption, if the prince of this world has been expelled from it (cf. John 12), how does he continue his nefarious work and how does he attack the human beings? Lucifer sends “in odium Ihesu Christi et invidiam nostri” seven devils who are captains of a uncountable army of devils. They are symbols of the seven capital vices [presented in the SALIGIA order] and are worst (nequiores) of Lucifer not in their hatred but in their effects. Seven biblical demons, each connected with a vice: Leviathan for pride; Mammon for greed;  Asmodeus for lust;  Beelzebub for envy; Belphegor for gluttony; Baalberith for wrath; Astaroth for sloth.

Ferrer begins by saying that he will follow the emperors’ style (“In isto sermone cogitavi tenere modum imperatorum etc”) – not clear what he means with it exactly. Yet, there is no main division. The sermon first comments on and dramatizes the Gospel pericope and then it discusses seven point derived from it. The postils and dramatization of the story of the transfiguration expand on elements present also in the previous sermon (see 3/6/17). It explain better the couples for the three tents: John with Moses as contemplatives and visioners; James with Elijah as champions of penance; Peter with Jesus since he chooses the better part (cf. Luke 10.42). The semi-dramatic section is livelier than in the previous sermon when it depicts the return of Moses in the limbo and of Elijah to Eden. The reason of their choice – i.e. the fasting during Lent - is developed in the fourth point of the sermon. Seven questions are presented without annuncing them and actually, they follow the narrative of the Gospel pericope (some points occur also in the previous sermon): 1. Transfiguration and shining of Jesus 2. The mountain symbolizes penance and it is associated with Lent, since it separates people from the world: “Unde et tempus quadragesimale est mons altus et desertus”. The good christians go up it, leaving behind the wordly pleasures. Penitence has the power to transform/transfigure Christ from the image of the inflexible justice to that of generous mercy: “In monte quadragesimali Christus transfiguratur de figura iusticie rigorose in figura misericordie copiose propter nostram penitentiam” (f. r5v). 3. Symbol of the three disciples: Peter symbolizes bishops and prelates who must know the Bible; John the virgins; James the martyrs. Otherwise: John the innocent people; Peter the obedient and James the penitents. 4. The choice of Elijah and Moses indicates all those – alive and death – who performed Lent correctly, with a parenetic address to the audience about their fasting: “Quis vestrum poterit dicere quod de toto tempore vite sue ieiunavit nam quadragesimam integram et perfecte? Credo quod pauci sunt”. The sermon recalls some common excuses of the people. Next it points out that the difference between the strain of Lent and the suffering in Hell (i,e. the destiny of those who dismiss penitence) is the same between wearing a delicate shirt and a burning armour. In hell fasting is perennial as it is attested by the rich man of Luke 16 (“modo MCCCC anni sunt et ultra…”; commonplace in sermons). Brief mention of the different way to fast of Jesus, Moises and Elijah (see previous sermon). 5. The two witnesses talked with Jesus about the extreme suffering of his Passion. This is presented in a  semi-dramatic form (“Iam videamus practicam…”), with Elijah and Moses who mention different moments of the Passion constantly arguing that it would be enough much less for the salvation/redemption of humanity. Other parenetic address to the audience: the listeners are called to resist against sin, presenting the paradox of thoseready to face a bear or to go to war and yet afraid of fasting during Lent. 6. Three tents symbolize the celestial hierarchies and are symbol of the future home of the saved people: penitentes (penitent with Elijah; the religious and political rulers (presidentes) with Moses; those who are excellentes who live an apostolic life will stay with Jesus. 7. The three apostles must not reveal what happened, to help the other disciles (see previous sermon) and to avoid vainglory.

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