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