The aim of this work, which is divided in the six chapters, was to research the influence of John of Damascus on Croatian renaissance writers. The division in the six chapters makes possible the better clearness and insight in the comprehension, perception and reception of work of John of Damascus in Croatian renaissance writers. The chapters Renaissance and Croatian Renaissance Writers and The Life and the Works of John of Damascus have importance to put out in the context the Croatian renaissance writers, particularly in the period of the 15th and the 16th C, and the seeing and accepting the John of Damascus as a church writer and authority. Their seeing and accepting of John of Damascus depends on the general comprehending and accepting of John of Damascus in their time but also in the context of the other church, theological and philosophical writers. Also there is some individual approach in consideration of the sources with which an individual Croatian renaissance writer was using. So there is some specific difference in the writers who were touching the biographical information considering of John of Damascus. The other chapters are bringing the information on comprehending and accepting of John of Damascus in the works of Croatian renaissance writers, but also taking over the beginning problems and putting it in the individual context of particular writer. Some interest on John of Damascus’s biography was shown in the works of Marko Marulić, Frane Petrić, Pavao Skalić and also the protestant writer Matija Vlačić Ilirik. The Renaissance and Croatian Renaissance Writers is the chapter in which was shown the similarity of methods of Croatian renaissance writers and the church and medieval authorities in consideration of elaborating the information, but also on the forms of writing and interpreting the materials. An example of this similarity is using of the form of dialog in the renaissance but also in the antique. The biographies of the particular Croatian renaissance writers, as well as their works have the informative character, but they are also the link with the other chapters in which the influence of John of Damascus is seeing mainly in their important and best known works. In that context are chosen, mainly in the chronological order Juraj Dragišić, Marko Marulić and Frane Petrić as the primary interest in the consideration of the meaning of their works, but also in the consideration of their names in the Croatian renaissance philosophy and cultural heritage, but also the others, again in the chronological order: Benedikt Kotruljević, Matija Vlačić Ilirik, Pavao Skalić and Nikola Vitov Gučetić. The Life and the Works of John of Damascus is the chapter that has the aim to show and accent the crucial moments from the life of John of Damascus. The information of his life will be garble later on through the various hagiographic works. So in the selection of accessible sources, VI the particular Croatian renaissance writer was also using and accepting the garble information. For example, Marko Marulić and possible using of Catalogus sanctorum et gestorum eorum by Petrus de Natalibus and also Frane Petrić and using of De Scriptoribus ecclesiasticis libro by Joannis Trithemi. Moreover there is an importance of description of main work of John of Damascus Fount of Knowledge (Πηγὴ γνώσεως), in fact its third part known in the Latin translation as De Fide Orthodoxa. Croatian renaissance writers are using with the Latin translation of De Fide Orthodoxa probably. But some of them have knowledge of the Greek original, because they quoted the Greek parts of sentences. First of all it is concerned on Frane Petrić, and also on Pavao Skalić and Matija Vlačić Ilirik. John of Damascus in Dragišić’s Work De natura caelestium spirituum quos angelos vocamus (1499) is the chapter in which is attention putting on the parts of text in which Dragišić refers to John of Damascus. The work is written in the form of dialog and discusses the metaphysical problems of angels as a special species or species of being. The work is divided into nine books. John of Damascus is mentioned in the first, third, forth, sixth, seventh, eighth and ninth book of Dragišić’s dialog. In the work De natura caelestium spirituum quos angelos vocamus John of Damascus is mentioned at least 19 th times. In the first book Dragišić refers to John of Damascus in the 2nd, the 5th, the 6th and the 8th chapter. The 2nd chapter of the first book is significant because of using the definition of John of Damascus from the 3rd chapter of 2nd book of De Fide Orthodoxa. So it is significant for defining the angels as a bodiless (incorporeal) reasonable nature (essence) that is always in the motion. In the 5 th chapter of the first book Dragišić also uses the definition of John of Damascus. Namely he uses the elements of the definition, as it is immortality of angel that follows from the God’s grace and not from the angelic nature (essence). In the 6 th chapter of the first book Dragišić discusses on problem of place of angels and also refers on the authority of John of Damascus. In the 8 th chapter Dragišić mentions John of Damascus and also refers again on the problem of definition of angels in the context of immortality by God’s grace. In the third book of Dragišić’s dialog De natura caelestium spirituum quos angelos vocamus John of Damascus is quoted in the 5th chapter which works out in the details the problem of angels free will in the consideration of opinions of authorities as are St. Thomas of Aquinas and Henry of Ghent. The John of Damascus is quoted in the context of “angels sinning”, namely, what is for the man death for the angel is fall. In the fourth book John of Damascus is mentioned in the 8th chapter. John of Damascus is mentioned in the context of creating the angles, especially in consideration of tradition of opinion of Gregory the Theologian with which tradition John of Damascus lean towards. Namely, the angels were created before the all creation. The sixth book of Dragišić’s dialog deals with the problems of VII angels sinning, namely, the angels fall and the problem of evil. John of Damascus is mentioned in the 12th chapter that discusses on the nature of Lucifer. In this discussion Dragišić uses the 4th chapter of the 2nd book of De Fide Orthodoxa which deals with the problem of “terrestrial”, namely the angels that fall. In this part of text it is possible to remark Dragišić’s tendency of paraphrasing. In the 5 th chapter of the seventh book Dragišić discusses on the problem of angels speech. Again, it is possible to remark the tendency of paraphrasing and Dragišić’s own interpretation of the contents of the 3rd chapter of the 2nd book of De Fide Orthodoxa. In the 3rd chapter of the 2nd book John of Damascus explains that the angels have no need of tongue or hearing. Namely, without uttering words angels communicate to each other their own thoughts and counsels. In two chapters, the 7th and the 10th of the eighth book Dragišić also refers on John of Damascus. The 7th chapter discusses on angels supervising the bodies and John of Damascus is mentioned in the context of so called “terrestrial angels” and their territory activity. The 10th chapter of this book discusses on the influence of angels on people, and interpretes the tradition that John of Damascus accepts. He was accepting and explaining that the evil angels may have the influence on a man if the man with his own will accepts some evil idea. In the ninth book Dragišić refers on John of Damascus in the 2nd, the 5th , the 7 th and the 8th chapter. The book is concerned with the problems of place and the motion of the angels. The 2nd chapter of the ninth book is concerned with the problem of eternity. In that text John of Damascus is mentioned in the context of angels and “their spaces” (places). John of Damascus and the 1st book of De Fide Orthodoxa are mentioned in the manner that the title of the work and the chapter in which John of Damascus discusses the problem of place of angels are not quoted explicitly. The quotation of the author where the title and chapter is not mentioned explicitly, leads to conclusion that Juraj Dragišić and the then circle of renaissance erudite philosophers and theologians have a good knowledge of the Latin translation and the division of work De Fide Orthodoxa in the four books. It must be accented that Dragišić in the 2nd chapter of the ninth book quotes the part of definition of eternity that can be found in the 1st chapter of the 2nd book of De fide orthodoxa. The 5th chapter of the ninth book of Dragišić’s dialog discusses on the place of angels and John of Damascus is mentioned in the similar context as it is in the 2nd chapter of the book. It must be point out that John of Damascus explains that the angels are not in the place in the manner of the body extent. The angles do not “possess” the look and the shape. In the “places” where they acts the angels rationally restricts their selves, and they could not act simultaneously on the different places because it is possible only for the God. The angels because of the quickness of their nature and the quickness of transition from place to place “acts simultaneously” on the different places. The angels are defined by the time because they have a beginning of their existence and VIII they are also definite by the space and comprehension. On some manner they know the nature of each other and the angels are completely defined by Creator. Otherwise in the 3rd chapter of the second book of De Fide Orthodoxa John of Damascus also deals with the problem of the place of angels. Also, in the 5th chapter of ninth book Dragišić refers on the 6th chapter of the 2nd book of De Fide Orthodoxa in which John of Damascus defines the heaven as a place that contents visible and invisible creatures. In the 7th chapter of the ninth book of Dragišić’s work John of Damascus is mentioned in the context of the limitation of angels considering the motion. In the 8 th chapter of the ninth book Dragišić discusses the problems of angels' simultaneousness. Moreover, this chapter repeats, works out in details and deepens the problems marked in the 2nd chapter, particularly the problems connected with the mentioning of John of Damascus. John of Damascus in the Works of Marko Marulić: the Critical Evaluation is the chapter of doctoral dissertation that represents the relation of Marko Marulić in consideration of John of Damascus and possible influence of John of Damascus on Marulić. In the different manner of the other Croatian renaissance writers which their relation to John of Damascus build, mostly, in reading and referring on his best known work De Fide Orthodoxa, Marko Marulić shows more interest for the life and moral activity of John of Damascus. Also in the different manner of the others Croatian renaissance writers he quotes the prose romance Barlaam and Joasaph. It is interesting that Marulić does not connect the prose romance Barlaam and Joasaph with the name of John of Damascus. In the two places in his work “The Institution” (1496) Marulić mentions John of Damascus explicitly: in the seventh chapter “On the faith in Christ – against the Jews” of the second book and in the third chapter “On the love for enemies” of the third book of “The Institution”. In the seventh chapter of the second book Marulić thinks that John of Damascus is a Jew, the most educated, the son of Jew named Mesue. Marulić also thinks that John of Damascus leans to Christianity with his free will because of his great knowledge of the Bible. Marulić’s information probably depends on Catalogus sanctorum et gestorum eorum (1493) by Petrus de Natalibus. It was shown that in this hagiographic work appears the similar information. In the third chapter of the third book Marulić brings out a legend of cutting the right hand of John of Damascus. The saint’s right hand heals up because of prayer to Holy Virgin. Marulić also thinks that John of Damascus was living in the period of the emperor Theodosio. All these pieces of information Marulić takes out probably from Catalogus sanctorum et gestorum eorum. The legend of Barlaam and Joasaph in Marulić’s work “The Institution” is quoted two times: in the first chapter “On hate of terrestrial goods because of Christ” of the first book and the fourteenth chapter “On revealing the infernal passions” of the sixth book of “The Institution”. Marulić brings the legend probably from Legenda aurea (Golden Legend), but he does not IX connect John of Damascus with the legend of Barlaam and Joasaph. But it must be stress that in Legenda aurea John of Damascus is mentioned as the interpreter of the story. Certainly, John of Damascus as a Christian writer and saint has an influence on Marko Marulić. It is shown in Marulić’s “The Institution” when he takes John of Damascus as an example of desirable Christian behaviour. However, Marulić’s perception of John of Damascus is not in the manner of contemporary critical editions. His perception of John of Damascus is adequate in the manner of hagiographic sources of his time. In the consideration of the reasons of writing “The Institution” Marulić probably takes the materials from the sources as it is hagiographic work Catalogus sanctorum et gestorum eorum. The Reception of De Fide Orthodoxa by Johan of Damascus in Petrić’s Nova de universis philosophia is the chapter that deals with the appearance of John of Damascus in the Petrić’s work. The great help in working out of this chapter were the two preliminary researches. These researches survey the connection, namely, particular influence of John of Damascus on Frane Petrić. Researches are issued in Filozofska istraživanja 72-73. The first research is the article “The Sources of Petrić’s Panarchia” by Davor Balić, and the second research is the article “Frane Petrić’s Collection of the Greek Manuscripts” by Vesna Cvjetković Kurelec. These two articles surveyed the appearance of John of Damascus as a source in Petrić’s work. However their aim of researching was different of the aim and approach in this work. Their aim was to expose the sources used by Frane Petrić in his works generally, especially in the work Nova de universis philosophia (1591). In this work the main aim is to show the influence of John of Damascus on Frane Petrić. Also it must be direct attention to the problem of incorrect translation of the Latin name Damascenus in Croatian edition of Nova de universis philosophia. The problem was also surveyed by Davor Balić. Frane Petrić quotes John of Damascus in the several books of Panarchia, Pampsychia and Pancosmia. Frane Petrić does not mention John of Damascus in the books of Panaugia. Frane Petrić mentions John of Damascus in the four books of Panarchia, namely in the ninth, the fifteenth, the sixteenth and the twenty second book. In the ninth book that is concerned with triune elements Frane Petrić quotes John of Damascus in the context of problem of Holy Spirit, more exact he quotes with Greek words the text: Πάντα τῇ оὐσίᾳ πληροῦν, πάντα συνέχον, πληρωτικὸν κόσμου κατὰ τὴν οὐσίαν, ἀχώρητον κόσμῳ κατὰ τὴν δύναμιν. Frane Petrić claims that the quoted text is placed in the 18th chapter of the 1st book of De Fide Orthodoxa. In “Migne” translation of De Fide Orthodoxa the text is placed in the 13th chapter of the 1st book. The problem is in the different divisions of Migne edition and the editions from the 16th and the 17th C. In the edition of Migne the 1st book contains 14 chapters, the 2nd book contains 30 chapters, the 3rd book contains 29 chapters, and the 4th book contains 27 X chapters. In the editions from the 16th and the 17th C the 1st book contains 19 chapters, the 2nd book contains 30 chapters, the 3rd book contains 29 chapters, and the 4th book contains 28 chapters. In the fifteenth book of his work Petrić deals with the problem of reason, and the words that he connects with John of Damascus can be found in the 6th and the 13th chapter of the 1st book and the 7th chapter of the 3rd book of De Fide Orthodoxa. All the three chapters are connected with the problem of God’s Logos. The sixteenth chapter of Panarchia questions: is the God Father a reason? The chapter is interesting because of Petrić’s attempt to place John of Damascus in the particular time period. Namely, he placed John of Damascus in the 4th C. The source for Petrić’s information could be the work De scriptoribus ecclesiasticis libro (1494) by Joannis Trithemi. In this book Petrić probably refers on the 4th and the 14th chapter of 1st book of De Fide Orthodoxa. In these chapters John of Damascus explains that the God is above every reason, existence and being. The twenty second chapter deals with the problem of creating the univers. In this chapter Frane Petrić claims that for the creating and Creator John of Damascus uses the Greek words κτίσις and κτίστης. The affirmation for the Petrić’s claim can be found in the 3rd chapter of the 2nd book of De Fide Orthodoxa. In the 3rd chapter of the 2nd book of De Fide Orthodoxa John of Damascus discusses the problem of angels. Petrić also refers to John of Damascus in the Pampsychia. More exactly he quotes them in the fourth book concerning the question and the problem: have the universe a soul? Petrić discusses the problem in the sense of “for and against” and strings many of Greek philosophers, as well as Christian fathers and writers. Frane Petrić mentions John of Damascus among many writers as one who denies the soul to universe. John of Damascus discusses the problem in the 6th and the 7th chapter of the 2nd book of De Fide Orthodoxa. Namely the 6th chapter discusses on Heaven. John of Damascus asserts that havens lights are without the soul or spirit. Namely John of Damascus considers the Creator as the only true source of everything. In Pancosmia the name of John of Damascus appears at least three times. In the fifth book which considers the problem of primary heat. In the fifteenth book with the question: are the stars flames? And in the notice of the church censor J. de Lugo on the seventeenth book that deals with the problem of motion the stars. In the fifth book Frane Petrić repeats in the shorter shape the quotation from the work of John of Damascus that he used also in the ninth book of Panarchia. The quotation is bounded to the problem of triune elements: Πάντα τῇ оὐσίᾳ πληροῦν. πάντα συνέχον, πληρωτικὸν κόσμου κατὰ τὴν οὐσίαν. So, in the context of primary heat, the heat and any created thing and also the quality are concerned with the God Creator. And the Creator keeps and fills out the univers with his essence. Almost the same words can be found in the 13th chapter of the 1st book of De Fide Orthodoxa. In the fifteenth book Frane Petrić in consideration of the problem of stars mentions XI John of Damascus together with Augustin. The confirmation of Petrić’s thoughts can be found in the 7th chapter of the 2nd book of De Fide Orthodoxa where John of Damascus claims that the fire is nothing else then the light. Interesting is, of course, the notice of church censor J. de Lugo on the seventeenth book. Namely, in his notice he also refers to John of Damascus. This fact can confirm that John of Damascus was the authority on which would refer the official church authorities in the renaissance time. So the authenticated author on which in the particular argumentation some author could refer to. The Others Renaissance writers: Kotruljević, Skalić, Vlačić and Gučetić is the chapter in which are exposed the authors that in their works mentions John of Damascus once (for example Benedikt Kotruljević) or the authors that mention John of Damascus several times through the different works that they wrote – Pavao Skalić and Nikola Vitov Gučetić. Also, the chapter brings out the information on John of Damascus of the work Ecclesiastica historia by Matija Vlačić Ilirik as its main editor and writer. Kotruljević refers to John of Damascus in his work Della mercatura et del mercante perfetto (On the Trade and on the Perfect Trader) (c. 1458). He mentions John of Damascus in the second book that deals with the religious problems. More exact Kotruljević refers to John of Damascus in the 2nd chapter of his book that considers the problem of the prayer. Kotruljević brings out the definition of prayer of John of Damascus. The prayer is seeking of the suitable things from the God. John of Damascus brings this definition in the 24th chapter of the 3rd book of De Fide Orthodoxa. Kotruljević corroborates the quotation of John of Damascus with the quotation of Thomas of Aquinas. So there is a great possibility as it was marked by Žarko Muljačić that Kotruljević quotes John of Damascus from the work of Thomas of Aquinas. The work Ecclesiastica historia (Magdeburg Centuries) by Matija Vlačić Ilirik as its main editor and in the great part the writer also refers to John of Damascus. In the eighth volume “The Eighth Century” (1564) of the work John of Damascus is quoted in the five chapters. Writer, probably Vlačić, quotes John of Damascus in the introductory chapter, the fourth, the fifth, the sixth and the tenth chapter. The subtitles in the fourth chapter that deal with the problems of doctrine contain almost all themes that can be found in the work De Fide Orthodoxa by John of Damascus. In the chapter the writer exposes: the God’s word, God, Trinity, union of God Father, divinity of Son, Christ’s humanity, two natures in Christ, redemption, expressions on God. He also quotes John of Damascus in the consideration of problems: of creating, God’s providence and God’s foreseeing, on “good” angels and the devil, on human, on free will in external things and spiritual things, on sin, on acts, on law, on predestination, on faith. Interesting is the subtitle on prayer because of mentioning John of Damascus in consideration of XII legend of Barlaam and Joasaph. John of Damascus is also mentioned in the subtitles that deal with: the punishment, on the baptism, the last supper, on antichrist, on the crucifix, on the marriage, on the eternal life, on astrology, on angels, on prayer and invocation of saints, on images, on Lord’s Supper, on Antichrist. The fifth chapter of The “Eighth Century” deals with the problem of heresies. John of Damascus is quoted once in the consideration of heresy of Monothelitae. In the sixth chapter that discusses the problem of rite John of Damascus is quoted in the subtitle of the rite: in general, baptism, penitence, on rites connected with last supper, on rites connected with prayers and festivals, mostly bounded with hymn. The information on John of Damascus writer brings out in the tenth chapter. The tenth chapter deals with the bishops and the life of Church fathers in the 8th C. Vlačić (writer) gives the information on John of Damascus. He brings out shorter review of the most important events of life of John of Damascus. He also brings out the works of John of Damascus and explains the doctrine and errors. Writer also mentions the “fights” and friends of John of Damascus. In the end writer explains some facts on death of John of Damascus and his friend Cosma. Some designations on influence of John of Damascus on Pavao Skalić can be found in the work Filozofija u enciklopedizmu Pavla Skalića (The Philosophy in Pavao Skalić’s Encyclopaedism) by Krešimir Čvrljak. John of Damascus and Pavao Skalić are mentioned in the consideration of soul, sprit and the problems of angels. Pavao Skalić quotes John of Damascus in three of his works: Encyclopaediae ..., Miscellaneorum de rerum caussis et successibus and Loci communes Theologici,..., Oratio. Skalić refers on John of Damascus in the both editions of Encyclopaediae ... (1559, 1571). In the first edition from 1559 he mentioned him once, and in the second edition from 1571 he mentioned him twice. In the both editions of Encyclopaediae ...appears the speech of Eubul. In the speech Eubul connects the Archangel Michael with the concept of species. Eubul also confirms his statement referring on the authority of John of Damascus. It is probably in the context of the question: is it possible to regard the Archangel Michael as separate species? It was shown that John of Damascus discusses the problem of angels in the 3rd chapter of the 2nd book of De Fide Orthodoxa. John of Damascus claims that the knowledge of the essence of angels is doubtful. The equality or difference among the angels is the knowledge that only God possess. The God also created them and He knows everything. The angels in the interpretation of John of Damascus are different in the consideration of the enlightening and the place they takes. In the second edition of Encyclopaediae ... from 1571, there is another place that mentioned John of Damascus by Pavao Skalić. Namely the character of Eulog mentions John of Damascus together with St. Jerome in the context of the creation of angels. John of Damascus leans in consideration of this question to Gregory the Theologian who XIII claims that the angels were created before the other creation. Of course, all that can be found in the 3rd chapter of the 2nd book of De Fide Orthodoxa. In the work Miscellaneorum de rerum caussis et successibus (1570) Pavao Skalić refers to authority of John of Damascus three times. In the 12th chapter named De suffragijs Mortorum of the first book he refers to the authority of John of Damascus when he discusses the memory of dead. Skalić does not mention in which work John of Damascus discusses the problem. But it must be say that John of Damascus is the author of the work that is titled De iis, qui in fide obdormierunt, quomodo missi e eleemosynis, quae pro illis fiunt, adjuventur. In the 32nd chapter named “De Visione” of the first book Skalić quotes John of Damascus in the Greek words. Skalić quotes him in consideration of the concept of συνάφειαν, the concept that John of Damascus uses in the 27th chapter of the 4th book of De Fide Orthodoxa concerning Resurrection. The concept means “again” connection of soul and body in the resurrection. In the 3rd chapter named “De Spiritualibus substantijs a Deo rebus praefectis” of the fourth book Skalić among Augustin, Gregory and Origen also refers to authority of John of Damascus in the context of the fall of angels. John of Damascus exposes the problem in the 4th chapter of the 2nd book of De Fide Orthodoxa. Croatian renaissance writers do not separate theology and philosophy in the manner of present humanistic experts. So, the appearance of John of Damascus in the Skalić’s work Loci communes Theologici, ..., Oratio (1571) was expected. In this Skalić’s work John of Damascus is mentioned in the three chapters: in the 1st chapter named “De ecclesia (et) eius autoritate”, in the 27th chapter named “Pro viuis viorumq(ue) succesibus” and in the 30th chapter named “De imaginibus”. Placing the particular Christian father through regions from which they come or live, in the 1st chapter Pavao Skalić places John of Damascus in Syria. John of Damascus was born and acting in Syria as a senior clerk at the court of caliphs of dynasty Umayyad. It was before his monk life in the monastery of Mar Sabah. Information is not present in the Skalić’s work. The 27th chapter is connected with two previous chapters, the 25th and the 26th chapter, so it is about “De oblatione Missae pro pec(c)atis (25), (et) Applicatione eiusdem pro defunctis (26) and Pro viuis viorumq(ue) succesibus (27).” Skalić among the council fathers and common Church fathers, namely writers, singles out Origen, John of Damascus, Jerome and Augustin. Again he uses the John of Damascus work De iis, qui in fide obdormierunt. In the 30th chapter named “De imaginibus” Skalić also mentions John of Damascus who is the author of the work Pro sacris Imaginibus Orationes tres. But the problem of Apostol’s tradition that Skalić refers to can be found in the 16th chapter of the 4th book of De Fide Orthodoxa. Nikola Vitov Gučetić refers to John of Damascus in the four of his works: Propositiones de causis, Dialogo d’amore (The Dialog on Love), Discorsi della Penitenza and work In Primum XIV Librum Artis Rhetoricorum Aristotelis Commentaria. The Latin work Propositiones de causis (1580) contains 32 propositions. In this work Gučetić discusses the problem of causes using the different concepts. John of Damascus is mentioned in the 22nd proposition in the consideration of the problems of God’s names, namely the origin of the word God. Gučetić refers to the 9th chapter of the 1st book of De Fide Orthodoxa where the problem is discussed. The problem of 9th chapter of De Fide Orthodoxa in the renaissance editions were placed in the 12th chapter of the 1 st book. So in his time, Gučetić refers to the 12th chapter of the 1st book of De Fide Orthodoxa. In the work “Dialogo d’amore” (1581) that was written on Italian language, Gučetić refers to the authority of John of Damascus concerning the concept of envy. The work is the philosophically imagined dialog between a poetess Cvijeta Zuzorić and Gučetić’s wife Mara Gundulić. John of Damascus describes the envy as pain over the good fortune of others. The problem is placed in the 14th chapter of the 2nd book of De Fide Orthodoxa where John of Damascus explains the problem of four varieties of pain. The work Discorsi della Penitenza (1589) is interesting because Gučetić mentions the second part of John of Damascus work Πηγὴ γνώσεως, the Latin translation of part named De haeresibus liber. In the work Discorsi della Penitenza Gučetić refers to John of Damascus in consideration of the 129th David’s psalm. The work In Primum Librum Artis Rhetoricorum Aristotelis Commentaria (1607?) by Nikola Vitov Gučetić was published in Heidelberg in 2006. The work contents 49 chapters and Gučetić discusses the problems of rhetoric and some other philosophical, humanistic and social themes. John of Damascus is mentioned twice. Gučetić refers to John of Damascus in the 31st and the 41st chapter. Considering the concepts of honesty and disgrace in the 31st chapter Gučetić also interpretes the concept of disgrace (shame). He refers to John of Damascus and the work De Fide Orthodoxa in which the problem is placed in the 15th chapter of the 2nd book. In fact, the chapter is dedicated to fear that John of Damascus divides into six various: shrinking, shame, disgrace, consternation, panic and anxiety. The disgrace is the fear that one feels when he commits the act of disgrace. In the 41st chapter Gučetić discusses on just and unjust acts. In this chapter Gučetić refers to various authorities and their works. He mentions Augustin, Cyril of Alexandria, John of Damascus, Paul the Apostol. In consideration of the problem of “written and unwritten” laws Gučetić quotes the words of John of Damascus that the Apostles were deposited many things unwritten. The problem can be found in the 16th chapter of the 4th book of De Fide Orthodoxa. The chapter considers the problems of holy icons. The work De Fide Orthodoxa is not the only work on which Croatian Renaissance writers refer to. However most of corroboration for the themes that they worked out can be found in this work. Because of compendious character of the work the Croatian renaissance writers probably use the work De Fide Orthodoxa as a manual.