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]