Search

Kad se u svom glavnom djelu Nova de universis philosophia (1591), osobito u njegovu drugom dijelu Panarchia, Frane Petrić poziva na Zoroastra i Oracula Chaldaica, upućuje na De fide orthodoxa (749) grčkoga crkvenoga naučitelja Ivana Damaščanskoga. Dapače, to djelo citira i u grčkom izvorniku i u vlastitu latinskom prijevodu, koji se ponešto razlikuje od izdanjā latinskih prijevoda djela De fide orthodoxa Ivana Damaščanskoga iz 16. stoljeća, primjerice od prijevoda Jacquesa Lefèvrea d’Ètaplesa. Petrić se u Panarhiji sedam puta poziva na misao Ivana Damaščanskoga. U devetoj knjizi Panarhije, naslovljenoj »De uno trino principio«, Cresanin citira Damaščaninovu rečenicu s četirima atributima Duha Svetoga: »koji sve ispunjava bivstvom, koji sve sadržava, koji svijet ispunjava po bivstvu, koji je nedohvatljiv svijetu po možnosti«. Taj se citat iz Ivana Damaščanskoga nalazi u trinaestom poglavlju prve knjige De fide orthodoxa naslovljenom »De loco Dei et quod solus Deus incircumscriptus sit«, a u latinskim izdanjima Petrićeva doba, primjerice u Lefèvreovu – u 18. poglavlju prve knjige pod naslovom »Collectanea de deo, patre, filio, spiritu sancto, verbo, spiritu«. Petrić dakle nastoji ideje razvijene u Zoroastra, odnosno sadržane u zbirci Oracula Chaldaica potkrijepiti tvrdnjom utjecajnoga grčkoga oca, autoriteta za kršćansko pravovjerje. U petnaestoj knjizi Panarhije, naslovljenoj »De intellectu«, Petrić se oslanja na tvrdnju Ivana Damaščanskoga: Logos Božji »ima sve što god roditelj ima«. Tu ili sličnu Damaščaninovu misao Cresanin je mogao pročitati na tri mjesta: u šestom poglavlju »De Verbo ac Dei Filio, probatio ducta a ratione« prve knjige De fide orthodoxa, u sedmom poglavlju »De una Dei Verbi composita persona« treće knjige istoga djela, kao i u već spomenutom trinaestom/osamnaestom poglavlju prve knjige. U šesnaestoj knjizi Panarhije, naslovljenoj »An Deus Pater sit intellectus?«, Petrić piše povijesni prikaz mišljenja o zadanoj temi te Ivana Damaščanskoga svrstava među one pisce koji su tvrdili da je Bog iznad razuma tj. koji ni Trojstvo ni Boga Oca nisu nazivali razumom (intellectus). Te misli Petrić crpi iz četrnaestog poglavlja »Proprietates seu attributa divinae naturae« prve knjige De fide orthodoxa, odnosno iz 19. poglavlja prve knjige u kasnorenesansnim tiskanim izdanjima De fide orthodoxa. U 22. knjizi Panarhije, naslovljenoj »De rerum creatione«, Petrić prvo ističe da Damaščanski za Stvoritelja upotrebljava grčku riječ κτίστης, a istočni naučitelj to čini u definiciji anđela u trećem poglavlju »De angelis« druge knjige De fide orthodoxa. Drugi se put Cresanin poziva na Damaščanskoga da bi istaknuo da se tri božanske osobe u kršćanskom nauku o Trojstvu razlikuju samo »po osobnim svojstvima«: »nerođenošću, rođenošću, izlaženjem« (ingenitura, genitura, processione), što Damaščanski obrazlaže u osmom i desetom poglavlju prve knjige De fide orthodoxa. Filozofe, koji su raspravljali o problemu svjetske duše, Petrić u četvrtoj knjizi Panpsihije, naslovljenoj »An mundus sit animatus«, dijeli u tri skupine: one koji su tvrdili da svijet tj. nebeska tijela imaju dušu, one koji su to nijekali i one koji se nisu opredijelili. Prema Cresaninu Ivan Damaščanski predvodi skupinu onih koji niječu da svijet ima dušu. Tu tvrdnju istočni otac obrazlaže u šestom poglavlju »De caelo« druge knjige De fide orthodoxa. Ime Ivana Damaščanskoga susreće se i u trima knjigama Pankozmije: petoj, petnaestoj i sedamnaestoj. U prve se dvije Petrić poziva na Damaščanskoga, a u sedamnaestoj se ime Ivana Damaščanskoga pojavljuje u primjedbi crkvenoga cenzora Jakoba de Luga. U petoj knjizi Pankozmije, naslovljenoj »De primario calore«, Petrić se, baveći se problemom prvotne topline, ponovo poziva na navod iz prve knjige De fide orthodoxa Ivana Damaščanskoga koji je već upotrijebio u devetoj knjizi Panarhije. U petnaestoj knjizi Pankozmije, naslovljenoj »An sidera sint ignes?«, Petrić koristi opću tvrdnju »naših bogoslova« da je nebo oganj. Damaščanski pak tu temu razrađuje u sedmom poglavlju »De luce, igne, luminaribus, Sole, Luna et stellis« druge knjige De fide orthodoxa. Filozof iz Cresa zapravo se poziva samo na tvrdnju Ivana Damaščanskoga: »vatra nije ništa drugo nego svjetlost«, dakle ne zauzima stavove o ostalim tvrdnjama koje Damaščanski izlaže u ‘astronomskom dijelu’ druge knjige De fide orthodoxa. Ime Ivana Damaščanskoga pojavljuje se i u sedamnaestoj knjizi Pankozmije, naslovljenoj »De astrorum motu«, ali ne u samom tekstu, nego u primjedbi oca Ja¬koba de Luga, crkvenoga cenzora. Radi se o tvrdnji u šestom poglavlju »De caelo« u drugoj knjizi De fide orthodoxa, kojom Ivan Damaščanski niječe da nebeska tijela imaju dušu. I sâm se Petrić pozvao na ovo mjesto u Damaščanskoga kad je u četvrtoj knjizi Panpsihije propitivao ima li svijet dušu. Time cenzor daje Petriću do znanja da poštuje to što se u svom djelu poziva na crkvenoga oca Ivana Damaščanskoga i njegovo djelo De fide orthodoxa. Ali cenzor također ide utrtom stazom jer se u tom pitanju na Ivana Damaščanskoga poziva i Toma Akvinski. De fide orthodoxa, glavno djelo Ivana Damaščanskoga, Petrić dakle čita vrlo selektivno. U vrlo razvedenom Damaščaninovu razglabanju o Presvetom Trojstvu Petrić pronalazi četiri uporišta, koja koristi pri pisanju Panarhije: atribute Duha Svetoga »koji sve ispunja bivstvom«, tvrdnju da je Otac »iznad razuma«, grčki nazivak za Stvoritelja i »osobna svojstva« triju božanskih osoba u kršćanskom nauku. Time Ivan Damaščanski postaje Petriću glavnim ‘saveznikom’ pri usklađivanju Zoroastrova nauka o počelima s kršćanskim pravovjerjem o Presvetom Trojstvu. Iz ‘astronomskog dijela’ druge knjige De fide orthodoxa Cresanin se poziva samo na dvije tvrdnje: »nebeska tijela nemaju dušu« i »vatra nije ništa drugo nego svjetlost«, a za sve ostale brojne teme koje je obradio u Pankozmiji ne traži uporište u Ivanu Damaščanskom. Na ‘psihološki’, odnosno antropološki dio druge knjige De fide orthodoxa Petrić se uopće ne poziva., When in his masterpiece Nova de universis philosophia (1591), notably in its second part Panarchia, Frane Petrić refers to Zoroaster and to him ascribed Oracula Chaldaica, he also refers to De fide orthodoxa (749) by the Greek Father St. John of Damascus. Moreover, he quotes the mentioned work both in the Greek original and in his own Latin translation, which somewhat departs from the Late Renaissance editions of Latin translations of De fide orthodoxa, as from that by Jacques Lefèvre d’Ètaples, for example. In Panarchia Petrić refers to Damascene’s De fide orthodoxa on seven occasions. In “De uno trino principio,” Book IX of Panarchia, the philosopher from Cres quotes Damascene’s sentence with four attributes of the Holy Spirit: “[He who is] filling all things with essence, maintaining all things, filling the universe with essence, while yet the universe is not the measure of His power.” This quotation is to be found in “De loco Dei et quod solus Deus incircumscriptus sit,” Chapter 13, Book I of De fide orthodoxa, that is, in its Latin editions of Petrić’s day, as, for example, in that by Lefèvre – in Chapter 18 of Book I entitled “Collectanea de deo, patre, filio, spiritu sancto, verbo, spiritu.” Therefore, the ideas developed by Zoroaster, as comprised in the Oracula Chaldaica, Petrić tries to support with an assertion by an influential Greek Father, authority for Christian orthodoxy. In “De intellectu,” Book XV of Panarchia, Petrić leans on an assertion by John of Damascus: “The Son is from Father, and derives from Him all His properties.” This, along with similar Damascene’s thoughts the philosopher from Cres may have read in the following three sources: in Chapter 6 “De Verbo ac Dei Filio, probatio ducta a ratione” of Book I De fide orthodoxa, in Chapter 7 “De una Dei Verbi composita persona” of Book III of the same work, as well as in the already mentioned Chapters 13 or 18 of Book I. In “An Deus Pater sit intellectus?,” Book XVI of Panarchia, Petrić writes a historical survey of sentences on the topic, whereby he includes John of Damascus among those authors who stated that God is above the intellect, i.e. who neither Trinity nor God the Father called the intellect (intellectus). These thoughts Petrić draws from Chapter 14 “Proprietates seu attributa divinae naturae” in Book I of the De fide orthodoxa, that is, from Chapter 19 in the Late Rennaisance editions of the same work. In “De rerum creatione,” Book XXII of Panarchia, Petrić first emphasizes that John of Damascus for the Creator uses the Greek word κτίστης, while the Greek Father does so in his definition of angel in the third chapter “De angelis” of Book II of De fide orthodoxa. The philosopher from Cres makes his second reference to John of Damascus in order to stress that three divine persons in the Christian doctrine on Trinity differ only “by personal properties”: “of not being begotten, of birth, and of procession” (ingenitura, genitura, processione), which Damascene argues in Chapters 8 and 10 of Book I of his De fide orthodoxa. In “An mundus sit animatus,” Book IV of Pampsychia, regarding the problem of world soul, Petrić divides the philosophers into three groups: those who argue that the world, i.e. heavenly bodies have a soul, those who refute it, and those who are undecided. According to Petrić, John of Damascus leads the group of those who reject that the world has a soul. This statement the Greek Father elaborates in Chapter 6 »De caelo« of Book II of his De fide orthodoxa. The name of John Damascene is also mentioned in Books V, XV and XVII of Pancosmia. In the first two books Petrić refers to John of Damascus, while in Book XVII the name of Damascene appears in an annotation of the Church censor Jacob de Lugo. In “De primario calore,” Book V of Pancosmia, while dealing with the problem of the primary heat, Petrić again refers to the quotation from Book I of De fide orthodoxa by John of Damascus, which he had already used in Book IX of his Panarchia. In “An sidera sint ignes?,” Book XV of Pancosmia, Petrić uses a general statement of “our theologians” that the heaven is fire. John of Damascus, however, expounds the topic in Chapter 7 “De luce, igne, luminaribus, Sole, Luna et stellis” of Book II of De fide orthodoxa. The philosopher from Cres actually refers only to the statement made by John of Damascus: “fire is not a different thing from what light is, as some maintain.” Therefore, Petrić does not submit his views on other statements which John of Damascus presents in the ‘astronomical part’ of Book II of De fide orthodoxa. In his annotation to Book XVII of Pancosmia, entitled “De astrorum motu,” Church censor Jacob de Lugo refers to the assertion in Chapter 6 “De caelo” of Book II of De fide orthodoxa, in which John of Damascus refutes that heavenly bodies have a soul. Petrić himself refers to this place in Damascene’s work when in Book IV of Pampsychia he questions whether the world has a soul. In so doing the censor lets Petrić know that he acknowledges the fact that in his work he refers to the Church Father John of Damascus and his work De fide orthodoxa. But the censor also follows a trodden path, since Thomas Aquinas also refers to John of Damascus regarding that issue. Thus Petrić’s reading of De fide orthodoxa, Damascene’s major work, may be described as rather selective. In Damascene’s most elaborate argumentation of the Holy Trinity, Petrić finds four points which he later used while writing his Panarchia: attributes of the Holy Spirit “filling all the things,” the assertion that the Father is above the intellect, Greek term for the Creator, and “personal properties” of three divine persons in the Christian doctrine of the Trinity. In this way John of Damascus has contributed to Petrić’s harmonization of Zoroaster’s doctrine on the principles with Christian doctrine on the Trinity. From the ‘astronomical part’ of Book II of De fide orthodoxa, the philosopher from Cres refers to only two assertions: “heavenly bodies have no soul” and “fire is not other than light,” while for all other numerous topics which he has discussed in his Pancosmia he does not lean on John of Damascus. To the ‘psychological,’ that is, anthropological part of Book II of De fide orthodoxa Petrić makes no reference whatsoever.