Introduction As the sun in the house of the lion has its maximum strength in attracting water, so Christ in his right time will ascent to his throne and attract everybody either to weeping (the damned) or to the exaltation of love (caritas) – as it is presented in the Gospel pericope. A quaestio: can the astrologers, prophets and philosophers discover when the end of the world will be? Reference to the predictions of Pseudo-Methodius, Eusebius, Beda, with several hypotesis between 1460 and 1560, and stating that the sermon is written in 1440 [See note below!]. Yet, the Gospel states that it is impossible to know it, since we must be watchful and look at the signs, since at any time the death can be upon us: «ut omni hora in ianuis mors appareat nos preparemus et vigilemus», as it is said with a detailed reference to the servants in the parable of the doorkeeper (Mark 13.33-37) (4Y). Division - First part  As the bell or trumpets announce to the people the proclamation of a death sentence, so there will be signs announcing the final judgment. These signs will concern: first, celestial bodies (brief presentation of the mutation in the sun, moon and stars); second, humans (mention of the Antichrist who «inauditis enim tormentis christianos sibi resistentes trucidabit»); third, natural elements – this part develops into the presentation of the fifteen signs before the final judgment, according to Jerome, who would have find them «in annalibus hebreorum». It follows the moral interpretation (moraliter), which is developed in an ecclesiastical perspective, according to the theory of the church as lighted up by the pope (sun) and the emperor (moon), while the stars represent the other Christians. Note the occurrence of the key terms of the debate: «Ad firmamentum igitur celi, hoc est universalis ecclesie, fecit deus duo luminaria, id est duas instituit dignitates, que sunt pontificalis auctoritas et regalis potestas» (5B). Connecting the situation with the opening of the seventh seal, the sermon introduces a subdivision: Papalis potestas obscurata Imperialis maiestas detestata Mundialis honestas deturpata 1.1. State of corruption of the pope  and the clergy: «Sic ut de presenti cernimus papalis auctoritas et totus status ecclesiasticus est intm obtenebratus in cordibus hominum quod nihil curatur» (5C), since without sanctity it looses its dignity. List of needed virtues of the clergy. Presentation of the ascetic virtues of the pagan priests (Jerome referring to Plato) to present an a fortiori reasoning concerning the Christian clergy. 1.2. The authority of the emperor and his emissaries («et quilibet eius substitutus») receive the power from God (as the moon from the sun) but to be respected it must serve to obey and to make people obey God and the Church. References to Romans 13 (Omnis potestas a domino deo est), Augustine and the Policraticus of John of Salisbury. 1.3. The falling of the stars symbolizes the Christians who have fallen from faith and love (caritas). This section – which probably had a more direct appeal to the intended audience – develops through two detailed similes. First, the carp that put its head into the mud to escape from the fishermen (i.e. from the prelates who call for conversion). The net touches only its tail, i.e. only in the moment of death h one listens due to fear of damnation. Rebuking a fictional question, the sermon underlines that one cannot reply to be not aware of it. This is explained with the second simile,which builds on the biblical image of the two streets and the topos of the man at the crossroads: A king built two cities, one is reached after a difficult and demanding journey and who arrive there is welcomed with all kind of pleasure and delights, the other leads through many pleasures but arrives to a city where one is sentenced to torture and death. Two companions, a fool man (stultus) and a wise man, arrive at the crossroads, where a statue is posed that clearly outline the two itineraries and the two outcomes. Yet, out of friendship, the wise person is convinced by the fool man to take the easy street, full of delights. He will not be able to avoid the death sentence by saying that he went there only to stay with his friend, «et sic ambo suspensi sunt». The fool and the wise are the body and soul. While the simile circulated widely [see Gesta Romanorum 67, with list], this version gives a (peculiar?) role to preachers, who are symbolized by the statue at the crossroads, which accomplishes its duty also without giving the example: «Statua igitur in medio ostendit viam regni esse meliorem scilicet prelatus, superius, predicator qui licet de se sit immobilis, nec vadat viam quam ostendit, veritatem tamen ostendit» (5H). Second part Description of the final judgment (cf. Matthew 25). The body of the saved resurrects in a perfect condition at the age of 33 (Christ), while those of the damned will be deformed. The book of the deeds of each person will be will be brought («O quam magnum cartularium tunc portabunt heretici, usurarii et alii malefacotres...»; 5I); at the right there will be sins that accuse and on the left the devils asking for just punishment of sinners. The moral interpretation (moraliter) focuses on (coscientia) by exhorting the listeners to do often the exam of conscience and to correct it, other it will accuse them publicly of their sins. There are three type of defect of the conscience: Coscientiam dilatatam Coscientiam infirmatam Coscientiam cauteriatam The first is a too loose conscience, which is as a net with to large holes, which does not filter small things. The second is the too scrupulous by considering as sin things that are not, with the risk of perplexity and even desperation. The last one focus on small details and does not care important things, like the Pharisees did, and it is compared to the spider’s net, which imprison only a fly but not major things. Final direct appeal, first person plural: «Istas cosciencias debemus rectificare, examinare, et purgare antquam veniamus ad iuditium, ubi nos accusabunt» (5K). Definition of the coscientia, with a list of titles that the good conscience deserves and its comparison with the mirror. Third part It focuses on the retribution and, after the description of Matthew 25, it underlines (moraliter) the benefit to contemplate hell in order to avoid it. The description of Hell is taken from Hugh of Saint Victor and it serves to introduce a series of clarification on the nature of hell and of its punishments (its fire). It clarifies that the souls can momentarily exit Purgatory and Hell only for a divine command, while the saved soul are free to move but do not do so unless this is a divine wish. Discussing about the suffrage for the souls, it is discussed the vision of Brandanus, who saw Judas resting from the torments on Sunday. The sermon clarify that this would not be due to suffrage, which cannot have effects on damned people, but out of a decision of God, who might decide to mitigate in some form the punishments, perhaps to repay something good done during the life («forte propter aliqua bona facta in vita»; 5S).

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 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 “Tempus istud quadragesimale et thema dant mihi motivum de quadam materia predicandi multi utili et necessaria persone que stat in peccato mortali et mala vita quo poterit exire peccatum per gratiam dei” (f. s6r). On the word surge and the story of Elijah, first a litteral interpretation and then “iuxta intellectum tropologicum vel moralem” (moral interpretation): land of Israel = the condition of sin. Ferrer explains the dynamic of retribution. The good works done in mortal sin have no merit but are useful, with an earthly reward and may contribute to return in the state of grace (“si continuaveris bonum opus retrahet te de peccato nec permittet te mori in mortali”). Yet, even after conversion, they will remain without eternal reward (this is true also for saints, such as Paul and Mary Magdalene, whose good works done before conversion were unremunerated). Key biblical text John 15: “quia sine me nihil potetis facerer”.  Sarepta = penance, which allow to raise from mortal sin: “Iuxta intellectum spiritualem modo videamus quomodo surget persona que diu dormit in peccato mortali”; list of biblical passages on surge/surgite. Division On rising from sin by tmeans divine grace, explained with the simile of getting out of bed in eight actions (see above). The sermon is structured around these eight actions. Main part 1) Opening the eyes = recognize sin, through grace - each one according to his/her state of life (exempla from religious life). Reference to David and Psalm 50 (Miserere). 2) Sitting up on the bed = contrition (with distinction from attrition). Example - giving voice to direct discourse - of a friar and a sentenced to death. True contrition: matter = pain of sins; form = awarness of having offended God. 3) Getting up, not naked but with a shirt = good resolution to amend, will to wear the new man (not yet effective, but it functions as a martyr's desire: it is already meritorious). The sermons dwells on the example of the loss of virginity and the impossibility of recovering it. 4) Go away from bed = abandon bad company (poet's quote: "Que nocitura tenes quamvis sint cara relique"; Distica Catonis?). Utmost clearly Christ: if a member is a scandal to you, cut it. It must be understood in a figurative sense (it recals the theme of the hand as an "organum organorum"), cut off dangerous relationships (servants, procurator, confessor, teachers...). 5) To spit abundantly (“spuit non solum materiam parvam sed grossam”) = confession  6)  Put on the shoes = forget past offenses and renounce to revenge: “Beatus qui potest dicere non habeo odium in corde”. 7) Put n the belt = repaying debts, fixing damages, and living soberly (“minuendo excessum et ornamenta vana”). 8) Wash hands (and face) = almsgiving. Sevral practical practical advice [already encountered in the Lenten sermon colletion]: a) divide the cash box in two ("in capsa"), so as not to mix badly acquired money with others - so that seeing them may arouse remorse and push one to return them; b) don't put the leftover food back in the pantry and don't give it to the dogs - it must be given to the poor.