Compiled and Translated from All Available Sources
On the sermon manuscripts: Capistrano’s Italian-period sermons are mostly lost, surviving only as preparatory outlines in his autograph codices. The richest surviving texts are the reportationes of his northern European preaching (1451–1453), particularly the forty-six sermon cycle preached in Vienna (June–July 1451). Four manuscripts preserve these nearly complete. The passages below draw on Sedda’s critical transcriptions and translations of those manuscripts, supplemented by biographical summaries in Hofer, contextual analysis in Roest, and one quote from E. Michael Jones.
Part I: Taxonomy of the Jewish Sermons
(Source: Sedda, pp. 140–141)
Sedda distinguishes two types of sermons concerning Jews in Capistrano’s corpus:
- Sermons “against” the Jews — polemic-paraenetical type, preached without the physical presence of Jews. These contain declared hostility toward Jews but are primarily directed at Christian audiences.
- Sermons “addressed to” Jews — conversionary-catechetical type, intended to be preached in the presence of Jews (whose attendance was legally compelled). These aim at conversion and adopt a more persuasive, if still polemical, tone.
Part II: General Principles — Proof from Scripture
The Fundamental Argument of the Jewish Sermons
(Source: Sedda, p. 148; Vienna sermon cycle, sermon no. 6, MS fol. 135r / M fol. 215r)
Capistrano opened his conversionary arguments with a methodological declaration drawn from Augustine:
Latin (MS / M, synoptic):
Unde pro fide nostra sufficiunt Scripturae, cum adducuntur testimonia inimicorum nostrorum, ut patebit quod quilibet possit defensare fidem, immo etiam antiqua vetula.
Unde dicit Augustinus 18 De civitate Dei: per fidem nostram sufficiunt Scripture que ex inimicorum nostrorum codicibus proferuntur. Audiant illa immu[n]di Iudei et ita potest <scire> quod fides nostra est fundata in veteri testamento.
English translation:
For the Scriptures suffice for our faith, when the testimony of our enemies is put forward — that will show that anyone can defend the faith, even an old woman. Consider all these things carefully, as will be shown hereinafter.
Augustine in The City of God, Book 18, says: The Scriptures are sufficient for our faith, which come from the books of our enemies. Let the impure Jews hear these things, and thus it is possible to know that our faith is based on the Old Testament.
Part III: Sermons on the Messiahship of Jesus Christ
The Vienna “Anti-Jewish Week” (18–24 June 1451)
(Source: Sedda, pp. 147–163; Appendix, pp. 168–169)
From Friday 18 June until Friday 24 June 1451 (the feast of St. John the Baptist), Capistrano preached a week-long series in open dispute with the Jews, addressing the second article of faith — the messiahship of Jesus Christ — a classic theme of Jewish-Christian disputation. The appendix to Sedda’s chapter gives the following schedule:
| Sermon | Date | Liturgy | Theme |
|---|---|---|---|
| 7 | 18 June | — | The second article of Faith |
| 8 | 19 June | — | The second article of Faith |
| 9 | 20 June | Trinity Sunday | Trinity and the second article of Faith |
| 10 | 21 June | St Anthony of Padua | The second article of Faith |
| 11 | 22 June | — | The second article of Faith |
| 12 | 23 June | — | Universal Judgement |
| 13 | 24 June | Corpus Domini | The Eucharist |
| 14 | 25 June | St John the Baptist | John the Baptist |
III.A — The Heresy of John the Baptist as Messiah
(Source: Sedda, p. 146; Padua sermon Renovavit sapientiam, 30 September 1450)
In the Padua sermon, Capistrano enumerates nine heresies against the Christian faith. The seventh concerns a heresy attributed to the Jews:
Latin:
Fuit alia Iudeorum heresis dicentium quod Iohannes Baptista erat verus messia, et Iohannes ait: Fuit homo misus [sic!] a Deo, cui nomen erat Iohannes. Hic venit in testimonium ut testimonium perhiberet de lumine. Et confessus est et non negavit: Quia non sum ego Christus; Iohanni primo c. Erat lux vera, scilicet Christus; Iohannis 8: Ego sum lux mundi, lux vera essentialis, increata et lux summe sapientie Dei.
English translation:
There was another heresy of the Jews, saying that John the Baptist was the true Messiah; and John said: “There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. He came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light.” And “he confessed, and denied not: I am not the Christ.” John 1: “He was the true Light” — that is, Christ; John 8: “I am the light of the world,” the true essential light, the uncreated light of the supreme wisdom of God.
III.B — The Exegetical Argument: Virgo vs. Alma
(Source: Sedda, pp. 148–150; Vienna sermon no. 7, 18 June 1451, MS fols 135v–36r / M fol. 216v)
Capistrano contests the Hebrew text of Isaiah 7:14, arguing that the Hebrew word almah (עלמה) must be read as “virgin”:
Latin (MS / M, synoptic):
Dicunt Iudei: textus noster non dicit sic, sed // dicit: ecce alma. Modo alma est iuvencula secrata, igitur: virgo puella. Ecce virgo concipiet. Non potest virgo alia concipere sine semine humano, nisi sola beata virgo; etsi detur possibilitas conceptionis in virgine corpore, non tamen <in> virgine mente, ut supra de Merlino.
Et ubi translatio nostra habet “virgo” ibi textus Iudeorum habet “alma” quid interpretatur iuvencula sancta vel secrata, igitur: est virgo velata iuvencula cum etiam est virgo. Ecce virgo concipiet et virgo pariet. Non potest virgo concipere sine semine humano, sed virgo gloriosa concepit in virgine corpore, sed non in virgine mente, non datur tamen partus virginis servata integritate nisi miraculose.
English translation:
The Jews say: Our text does not say so, but it says “ecce alma.” Now “alma” is a young consecrated girl — therefore: a virgin girl. “Behold, a virgin shall conceive.” No other virgin can conceive without human seed, except only the Blessed Virgin; even if the possibility of conceiving is present in the body of the virgin, it is not in the mind, as above with regard to Merlin.
Where our translation has “virgo,” the text of the Jews has “alma,” which means holy and consecrated young girl — therefore a veiled young virgin who is still a virgin. “Behold, a virgin shall conceive and shall give birth.” A virgin cannot conceive without human seed, but the glorious Virgin conceived in her virginal body, but not in her virginal mind. It is not, however, a virgin birth unless her integrity is preserved in a miraculous way.
Commentary (Sedda): Capistrano objects to Jewish exegesis with an argument popular among Christians: a girl cannot conceive without human seed — except in the case of the Blessed Virgin — as this would otherwise be analogous to the Legend of Merlin, where the protagonist was conceived by a virgin through the intervention of the devil and was destined to become the Antichrist. John applies this popular legend to discredit Jewish exegesis.
III.C — The Name Dominus in the Hebrew Bible; Nicholas of Lyra
(Source: Sedda, pp. 149–150; Vienna sermons nos. 6 and 9, MS fol. 133r / M fol. 211v–12r)
Latin (MS / M, synoptic):
Dicit Nicolaus de Lyra: ubicumque in veteri testamento habetur Dominus, intelligitur de Messia, Filio Dei, tunc humanando; nunc incarnato.
Dicit Nicolaus de Lyra in prologo psaltery sui quod ubicumque in veteri testamento describitur Dominus, semper intelligitur de Christo, tunc incarnando et nunc incarnato.
English translation:
Nicholas of Lyra says: Wherever in the Old Testament it has the word “Dominus,” it is to be understood as “Messiah, the Son of God” — at that time to be incarnated, now incarnate.
Nicholas of Lyra says in the prologue of his Psalter that wherever in the Old Testament it is written “Dominus,” it is rather to be understood as “Christ” — at that time to be incarnated, now incarnate.
III.D — Accusation That Jews Have Falsified Their Scriptures
(Source: Sedda, pp. 150–151; Vienna sermon no. 9, 20 June 1451, MS fol. 136v / M fol. 217v / S fol. 235v, synoptic)
Latin:
Et dixit quod Iudei multa abraserunt de libris eorum, que concernunt veritatem nostre fidei.
Hi qui venerunt ad fidem de Iudeis cum rabi dixerunt mihi quod ipsi abraserunt plura verba que sunt de veritate fidei nostre et quotidie radunt ut se per hoc excusarent Messias est Deus.
Et hii qui venerunt ad fidem dicunt quod ipsi abraserunt multa verba que dicunt de veritate fidei Messias est Deus.
English translation:
He said that the Jews erased many things from their books about the truth of our faith.
The Jews who came to faith with the rabbi told me that they erased many words that are about the truth of our faith, and today they scrape this away so that through this they may justify that the Messiah is God.
Those who came to faith said that they erased many words that speak about the truth of faith — that the Messiah is God.
III.E — “I Believe Jerome More Than All the Jews“
(Source: Sedda, p. 151; Vienna sermon no. 9, MS fol. 136v / M fol. 217v / S fol. 235v, synoptic)
Latin:
Dicunt aliqui Iudei quod non habeant <nomen> Deus in libris ipsorum; sed plus credo Hieronymo quam omnibus Iudeis.
Dicunt autem Iudei quod eorum textus non habet hoc nomen Deus; plus tamen credo Ieronimo quam omnibus Iudeis.
Dicunt Iudei quod non habet hoc nomen Deus in Biblia; plus credo Ieronimo quam omnibus Iudeis.
English translation:
Some Jews say that they do not have the name “Deus” in their books, but I believe more in Jerome than in all the Jews.
The Jews say that their text does not have the name “Deus,” but I believe more in Jerome than in all the Jews.
The Jews say that it does not have this name “Deus” in their Bible, but I believe more in Jerome than in all the Jews.
III.F — Jews Are Worse Than the Men of Nineveh
(Source: Sedda, p. 167, fn. 50; MS Cod. Lat. 16191, M fol. 248va)
Latin:
Loquitur Dominus, dicens: Viri Ninivite iudicabunt vos. Viri enim Ninivite erant gentiles, Iudei autem dicebantur cultores Dei; nolebant Iudei credere Christo et ego dico vobis quod vos Iudei peiores estis Ninivite et ideo iudicabunt vos.
English translation:
The Lord spoke, saying: “The men of Nineveh shall rise in judgement with you” [Matthew 12:41]. The men of Nineveh were pagans, but the Jews were said to be worshippers of God; the Jews did not want to believe in Christ, and I say to you that you Jews are worse than the men of Nineveh and therefore they judge you.
Part IV: Blasphemy, Murder, and the Name of Jesus
IV.A — Blasphemy as Greater than Murder
(Source: Sedda, pp. 151–153; Vienna sermon no. 8, 19 June 1451, MS fol. 140r / M fol. 223v / S fol. 257vb, synoptic)
Latin:
Non est autem ita grave peccatum sicut blasphemia. Unde Augustinus dicit: “Non scivit maius peccatum invenire Cayphas quam blasphemiam; igitur ipse ascripsit Christo.” Unde Augustinus: “Non minus peccant hodie blasphemantes Christum regnantem in celis quam tunc peccaverunt Christum crucifigentem in terris.” Igitur peccatum blasphemie magis peccato homicidii.
Dicens tota die blasphemant nomen Domini [Isaiah 52:5]. Augustinus autem dicit: maius est peccatum blasphemie quam homicidii, quia hec, scilicet blasphemia, ad idolatriam refertur. Et hoc probatur per illud cum Dominus Iesus fuit presentatus Cayphe qui eum interrogavit dicens si tu es Christus, filius Dei. Respondit Iesus: tu dixisti. Cayphas ait: blasphemavit etc., Matthei 27 [63–65]. Super quo Augustinus nescivit Cayphas invenire peccatum a Deo horribile sicut est peccatum blasphemie. Et sanctus Thomas: non numquid peccant hodie blasphemantes Christum, qui nunc regnat in celis, quam illi qui tunc peccaverunt et Christum blasphemaverunt, tunc crucifigentes peregrinantem in terris.
English translation:
For there is no sin as serious as blasphemy. Thus Augustine says, “Caiaphas could not find a greater sin than blasphemy; thus he accused Christ of it.” Thus Augustine says, “Those who today blaspheme Christ reigning in heaven do not sin any less than those who crucified him on earth.” Therefore the sin of blasphemy is greater than the sin of murder.
It says, “Every day they blaspheme the name of the Lord” [Isaiah 52:5]. Thus Augustine says, “Blasphemy is a greater sin than murder because it is a form of idolatry.” And this is proved by the fact that when Lord Jesus was presented to Caiaphas who interrogated him by saying, “If you are the Christ, the son of God,” Jesus responded, “It is you who say it.” Caiaphas said, “He has blasphemed,” etc. [Matthew 27:63–65]. Concerning this, Augustine says that Caiaphas could not find a sin more horrible to God than the sin of blasphemy. And St Thomas says, “Those who today blaspheme Christ now reigning in heaven do not sin any less than those who blasphemed Christ then and crucified him when he walked on earth.”
Commentary (Sedda): John connects the sin of murder to blasphemy, creating a link between those who once killed and committed an act of blasphemy by crucifying Christ, to those who commit blasphemy even today — a more serious sin than murder. Blasphemy is closely related to Jews and to their incredulitas and stubborn infidelitas, which make them almost incapable of believing the truth.
IV.B — The Twelve Maledictions against Those Who Crucified Christ
(Source: Sedda, pp. 153–154; Vienna sermon no. 10, 21 June 1451, MS fol. 145r / M fol. 239ra)
Latin:
Cum dicit quem tu percussisti persecuti sunt [Psalm 68:27], hoc dixit de Iudeis crucifigentibus Christum et pronuncia duodecim maledictiones, ut patet numerando secundum ordinem. Et possunt hodie illa verba dici de quolibet maledicente Christum.
Et hodie intelligitur hoc de omnibus blasphematoribus Dei, ponuntur enim ibidem duodecim condiciones malorum, scilicet vindictam, retribucionem scandalum etc. duodecim ibi ponuntur malediciones Iudeorum.
English translation:
“When he says, ‘Beat whom you have beaten’ [Psalm 68:27], he said this about the Jews who crucified Christ; pronounce twelve maledictions so that they are clearly enumerated in order. And today those words can be said about anyone who curses Christ.
Today this is understood to refer to all blasphemers of God, for twelve kinds of evil are placed on them — that is, revenge, retribution, scandal, etc. — twelve curses are placed upon the Jews.”
Commentary (Sedda): John applies the twelve maledictions of Psalm 68 to “the Jews who crucified Christ,” not so much for the actual act of crucifixion, but because they were blasphemers of the name of Christ. John establishes a link between the unbelief of the Jews in Christ’s name and disbelief in his divinity, for which they are cursed.
IV.C — The Name of Jesus: Iesus (Divinity) vs. Christus (Humanity)
(Source: Sedda, pp. 153–155; Vienna sermon no. 7, 18 June 1451, MS fol. 136r / M fol. 217r)
Latin:
Ecce Iesus solum variatur per tres casus secundum terminationes, ut Iesus, Iesum, Iesu: hoc significat Patrem, Filium et Spiritum sanctum. Christus autem variatur secundum multos casus. Igitur sic non est adequate proprium Deo sicut ly IHS et IHUS, Iesus sonat nomen divinum vel nomen Dei recte intelligendo et habet solum tres casus, scilicet Iesus, Iesu, Iesum, idest variacones Patrem, Filium et Spiritum sanctum. Christus autem habet variacionem per omnes casus, tam in singulari quam in plurali: nolite tangere Christos meos [Psalm 104:15]. Christus est nomen hominis, Iesus est nomen Dei.
English translation:
The word “Iesus” changes only in three cases according to its endings — Iesus, Iesum, Iesu — which signifies Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. But “Christ” changes according to many cases. So “Christus,” that is “anointed,” is not reserved for God alone like “IHS” and “IHUS” (that is, “Saviour”), as there are many who are anointed, like all the faithful in the sacrament of baptism. So “Christus” refers to humanity, “Iesus” to the deity. “Iesus” sounds like a divine name, or the name of God, and has only three cases — Iesus, Iesu, Iesum — that is, variations for Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. But “Christus” has variations for all cases, both singular and plural: “Do not touch my anointed ones” [Psalm 104:15]. Christus is the name of the man; Iesus is the name of God.
Commentary (Sedda): The sin of the Jews is their failure to recognize in the name of Jesus his divinity — making them guilty of blasphemy and cursed with the words of Psalm 68: “Add iniquity unto their iniquity.”
IV.D — Excerpt from E. Michael Jones
(Source: E. Michael Jones, The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit, IN: Fidelity Press, 2020, pg. 226)
“Christ is King, and Christ’s Church is the kingdom of God. The Jews are the descendants of those who killed this king. They have inherited hatred against Christ from their ancestors, and they give it full vent wherever they can do so with impunity. Therefore, we are justified in suspecting them. They are now simply our enemies and are known as such. They have crucified our Lord Jesus Christ.”
Part V: Baptism versus Circumcision
V.A — Naaman the Syrian as Typos of Baptism
(Source: Sedda, pp. 155–158; Vienna sermon no. 7, 18 June 1451, MS fol. 137v / M fol. 219ra–b / S fol. 236va–b, synoptic)
Capistrano uses ten figures from the Old Testament as typoi prefiguring baptism. Of these, Naaman the Syrian (IV Kings 5) occupies a privileged place as the marginalized outsider — a foreigner and leper — saved by sevenfold washing in the Jordan, the anti-typos of baptism:
English translation (Sedda, composite from three manuscripts):
Eighth symbol: Elisha the prophet, disciple of Elijah, said to him: “Do this so that your spirit might remain in me.” Naaman the general was a powerful man, IV Kings 5: Robbers went out from Syria and they fought a battle and they captured a Hebrew girl whom they presented to Naaman. Seeing that he was a leper, she said, “If my lord was in the land of Israel, he would be healed.” The king said to Naaman, “Go to the land of Israel.” And he went with many treasures and he presented himself to the king of Israel. When Elisha heard this, he sent to the king and said, “Send Naaman to me so that he may know that there is a prophet in Israel.” Then Elisha said to his companion, “Go and tell Naaman to go to the Jordan and bathe himself seven times and he will be cured of his leprosy.” Naaman did not want to and was scandalized by these words. But he was persuaded to go by his advisers and he was cleansed of his leprosy, IV Kings 5. See, he was washed seven times in the Jordan. The Jordan signifies the river of justice which will be open on the day of judgement.
Commentary (Sedda): Naaman becomes a symbolic reference of the marginalized infideles who can nonetheless save themselves — by analogy, the Jew who converts and accepts baptism.
V.B — Circumcision Superseded by Baptism
(Source: Sedda, pp. 157–159; Vienna sermon no. 8, 19 June 1451; and Padua sermon)
Sermon no. 8, taking its thema from Romans 5:1 (“iustificati igitur ex fide” — “therefore being justified by faith”), challenges circumcision as practiced by Jews:
Circumcision was given to Abraham “in figuram pocius quam in rem” [in appearance rather than in substance]. This sign relates only to males and represents the deeper circumcision of the heart. Adam, Noah, Enoch, and all the Israelites who wandered in the desert for forty years were not circumcised; if circumcision were necessary for salvation, they would all have been damned — but they were not; they were justified by their faith, as the story of Abraham shows.
Latin (Padua sermon):
Pur aliqui ipsum receperunt et illis dedit potestatem filios Dei fieri, qui credunt in nomine eius et qui non habuerunt gratiam per affinitatem et carnalitatem. Ideo non ex voluntate viri neque ex voluntate carnis, sed ex Deo nati sunt, per adoptionem, creationem et redemptionem, videlicet per aquam sancti baptismi, quia qui non fuerit renatus ex aqua et Spiritu sancto non intrabit in regnum celorum.
English translation:
Some persons have received them and to others he gave the power to become sons of God — some believed in his name, others did not have his grace by means of affinity and carnality. For this reason, not from the will of man nor of the will of the flesh, but of God they were born, by adoption, creation and redemption — that is to say, through the water of baptism — because he who has not been born again of water and of the Holy Ghost shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.
Commentary (Sedda): It is therefore baptism that completes circumcision and permits one to enter the sheepfold of believers, making them children of adoption, creation, and redemption. To enter what Todeschini calls “the threshold of the social perimeter,” one may pass beyond being a Jew only through the door of baptism.
Part VI: The Eucharist — Twelve Questions Addressed to the Jews
(Source: Sedda, pp. 158–162; Vienna sermon no. 13, Corpus Domini, 24 June 1451, MS fol. 156v–157r / M fol. 251r–v / S fol. 255r–v)
In sermon no. 13, after discussing transubstantiation in theological and scholastic terms, Capistrano poses twelve questions to the Jews, drawing on figures and episodes from the Old Testament. The twelfth question introduces three typoi of the Eucharist: the tree of life, the offering of Melchizedek, and the Paschal lamb.
Latin:
Dicant eciam: quid eis videtur facilius, si bene considerarent figuras nostri sacramenti? Fatenturne lignum vite creatum <esse> in medio paradisi? Hoc lignum vite figuravit hoc excellentissimum sacramentum. Unde dicit Salvator: ego sum panis vivus, qui de celo descendit, Iohannis 6 [41]. Sciant eciam quod sacramentum ex sacrificio Melchisedech sacerdotis, Genesis 14 [18], qui panem et vinum obtulit. Videant: quid significabat agnus paschalis, qui datus est eis in signum huius sacramenti? Ideo, Iohannis 1 [29] dictus est Iesus agnus: Ecce agnus Dei, de quo dicit sanctus Thomas: “Post agnum typicum datum discipulis” etc. Ille igitur agnus significabat corpus Domini nostri Iesu Christi et hoc salutare sacramentum.
English translation:
Let them also say: what seems easier to them, if they were to consider carefully the symbols of our sacrament? Do they not say that the tree of life was created in the middle of paradise? This tree of life prefigured this most excellent sacrament. Thus the Saviour says, “I am the living bread who descended from heaven” [John 6:41]. They also know that the sacrament comes from the sacrifice of the priest Melchizedek, Genesis 14:18, who offered bread and wine. Let them see: what did the Paschal lamb signify, which was given to them as a sign of this sacrament? Therefore in John 1:29 Jesus was called the Lamb: “Behold the Lamb of God,” of whom St Thomas says, “After the typical lamb was given to the disciples,” etc. That lamb therefore signified the body of our Lord Jesus Christ and this saving sacrament.
Commentary (Sedda): John challenges the Jews: how can they believe so fervently in the miraculous signs narrated in their own Bible, and yet not believe that bread and wine may become the body and blood of Christ?
Part VII: Conversionary Episodes — Jews Brought to Baptism
(Source: Sedda, pp. 142–146; Vienna sermons nos. 7 and 14)
VII.A — The Conversion of the Roman Rabbi, Palm Sunday 1450
In Vienna sermon no. 7 (18 June 1451), Capistrano recounts a recent conversion he facilitated in Rome:
Latin (MS fol. 136v / M fol. 217r / S fol. 235v — Sedda’s synoptic English translations):
| MS | M | S |
|---|---|---|
| Last year on Palm Sunday, the leader of the Jews was baptized, that is their rabbi, now called William, and then during the year fifty-two Jews were baptized. | By the will of God, we led the leader of the Jews in Rome to the sacrament of baptism on Palm Sunday of the year 1450 and many matters of faith were touched on and expounded and fifty-two Jews were baptized during the year. | We led to baptism V., leader of the Jews, on Palm Sunday of the year 1450, and many facts about faith [were expounded] and fifty-two Jews were also baptized. |
And from the Nuremberg sermon (20 July 1452):
Latin:
Dico, quod in anno iubileo recepimus ad baptismum ipsum Aggellum politice summum in urbe Romana et recipiendo caput bene quinquaginta secuti sunt eum.
English translation:
I say, that in the year of jubilee we received into baptism the same Aggellus, the highest political leader in the city of Rome, and once the head was received, fifty men followed him.
VII.B — The Conversion of a Jewish Physician at the Court of Queen Joanna II of Naples
(Source: Sedda, pp. 143–146; Vienna sermon no. 14, 25 June 1451, MS fol. 159v / M fol. 254ra–b / S fol. 257vb / V fol. 9v, synoptic)
Capistrano narrates his contest with a learned Jew and the eventual conversion of the man, his wife, and their family:
| MS | M | S | V |
|---|---|---|---|
| I had a great contest with a certain very intelligent Jew. I said to him, “Either you pervert me or I convert you,” and he was converted and became a knight and a member of the third order and his name was Ladislaus. And the queen gave him many good rewards and made him a knight and he had six children. His wife did not want to be converted but her children were taken away from her and afterwards she asked to be baptized. This was done and she equally received the order of St Francis and they are both still alive today. Thus as it is said, “that he may turn the hearts of the parents unto the children” [Luke 1:17]. | A certain well-read Jew in our land was converted to the faith and Queen Joanna II, wife of Wilhelm of Austria, father of Lord Frederick, called him Ladislaus, made him a knight and gave him many rewards. The Jew also had a wife and six children. She did not want to be converted to the faith and I said to the Jew, “For the reasons that you were baptized, also baptize your children,” and he did. Seeing that she had deprived herself of her children, his wife also asked for baptism and they both live to this day and together received the third order of St Francis. “That he may turn the hearts of the parents unto the children” [Luke 1:17]. | There was a well-read Jew who converted and was made a knight by Queen Joanna II. The queen called him Ladislaus and gave him rewards. He had a wife and six children and his wife did not want to be converted. I said to him, “For the reasons that you were baptized, you should baptize your children.” Seeing herself deprived of her children, his wife asked for baptism. Both of them are still alive and they received the order of St Francis in the third order. “That he may turn the hearts of the parents unto the children” [Luke 1:17]. | Recently a certain Jew converted, a very trustworthy and faithful doctor. At last, after much effort, he had his children baptized, despite the fears of his wife who did not want her children converted. But once her children were set free, she herself asked for baptism, feeling greatly deprived of the comfort of her daughters. And they took their many children and together they received the third order of St Francis and led a praiseworthy life. |
Part VIII: Biographical Summary of Capistrano’s Stated Attitude toward Jews
(Source: Hofer, pp. 250, 279)
VIII.A — Opening Declarations
In his Jewish sermons, Capistrano addressed his audience directly as “our most dear Jews,” invoking St. Hilary of Poitiers:
“If I do not love the Jews, I am not a good Christian. Was not Christ a Jew? And the Blessed Virgin Mary? Were not the apostles Jews? To obtain graces for the Jews, of whose race Christ willed to be born, do I preach these sermons.”
He declared his method:
“I will prove to you the articles of our faith with the authority of your own law, the Old Testament.”
VIII.B — On Forced Conversion and Canonical Separation
Latin (MS Munich, Staatsbibliothek Cod. Lat. 13571, fol. 38r; cited in Roest, p. 132):
Judeis non sunt cogendi, sed con benevolentia animandi. Sunt tamen servanda decreta sanctorum patrum.
English translation:
Jews are not to be compelled, but encouraged with kindness. Nevertheless the decrees of the holy fathers must be observed.
(Source: Hofer, p. 279)
He is always aware that faith cannot be compelled: the Jews must never be forced, but are to be kindly encouraged. However, the laws of the Christian past must be observed. The Jews, if they will not believe, must be kept separated from Christians.
He assured them from the pulpit:
“If they will but hear the word of God, he will love them as he loves his nearest relatives.”
And:
When a Jew believes in Christ and is baptized, there is no difference between the Christian and the Jew.
VIII.C — Warning: Jews Believe They Are Justified in Killing Christians
(Source: Hofer, p. 279; Roest, p. 137; cf. MS Munich, Staatsbibliothek Cod. Lat. 16191, fol. 222v)
He once asserted that the Jews believed themselves entitled to kill all Christians, but that on account of their small number they did not dare to say this publicly.
Part IX: Scholarly Context
IX.A — Capistrano within the Franciscan Adversus Judaeos Tradition
(Source: Roest, pp. 131–134)
Like Bernardino of Siena, Giacomo della Marca, and Antonio of Bitonto, Giovanni of Capestrano was formally opposed to forced conversion and referred to the Jewish background of Christ, Mary, and the Apostles. At the same time, he emphasized the Jewish responsibility for the death of Christ and their malevolent antagonism toward the Christian faith, and warned consistently that the Jews posed a tremendous danger to Christian society. He was involved with Nicholas V’s papal apostolic letter Super gregem dominicum (1447), which appointed him as general executor of measures to ensure the complete separation and marginalization of the Jews.
IX.B — The Function of the Conversionary Sermons
(Source: Sedda, pp. 147–148; Roest, pp. 133–134)
The emphasis in the conversionary sermons was on “the inability of Jews to recognize the true nature of Jesus because of their own blindness.” Roest notes that these sermons were therefore as much directed at the Christian population — to confirm them in their faith — as they were at the Jews themselves. The failure to convert many Jews voluntarily could always be used to re-emphasize the hardened nature of the Jewish population.
IX.C — Capistrano’s Place in the Radicalization of Anti-Judaic Discourse
(Source: Roest, pp. 142–143)
Compared with his colleagues and disciples, Giovanni of Capestrano was not a complete extremist within the Observant branch. However, insofar as his homiletic propaganda for the creation of a pure and unified congregatio fidelium untainted by sin and unbelief was taken up by colleagues and disciples — who portrayed the Jews in ever more negative and damaging stereotypes — his words and deeds likely did facilitate the radicalization of an anti-Judaic homiletic discourse that remained common far into the Early Modern period.
Appendix: Manuscript Sources for the Vienna Sermon Cycle
(Source: Sedda, p. 163 fn. 33; Appendix pp. 168–169)
The reportationes of Capistrano’s forty-six Vienna sermons survive in the following principal manuscripts:
| Siglum | Location | Shelfmark | Folios |
|---|---|---|---|
| M | Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek | Clm 16191 | 192ra–311va |
| MS | Maria Saal (Austria), Archiv des Collegiatstiftes | 6 | 122r–288r |
| S | Seitenstetten, Benediktinerstift | 241 | 231ra–406va |
| V | Vorau, Bibliothek der Augustiner-Chorherrenstifts | 133 | 1r–85v |
| — | Graz, Universitätsbibliothek | cod. 301 | 156r–88r |
| — | Vienna, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek | cod. Lat. 3741 | 128ra–56ra |
| — | Klosterneuburg | cod. 801 | 47–48 (excerpt) |
| — | Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek | Clm 18626 | (one sermon) |
Sources:
- Filippo Sedda, “The Anti-Jewish Sermons of John of Capistrano: Matters and Context,” in The Jewish-Christian Encounter in Medieval Preaching, ed. Jonathan Adams & Jussi Hanska (London–New York: Routledge, 2014), pp. 139–167.
- Bert Roest, “Giovanni of Capestrano’s Anti-Judaism within a Franciscan Context: An Evaluation Based on Recent Scholarship,” Franciscan Studies 75 (2017), pp. 117–143.
- Johannes Hofer, St. John Capistran, Reformer (St. Louis: B. Herder, 1943).
- E. Michael Jones, The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit, IN: Fidelity Press, 2020, pg. 226