Marc Antonio de Dominis

The Most Reverend Markantun de Dominis Marco Antonio de Dominis
Archbishop of Split
Portrait from De Republica Ecclesiastica (1610)
Archdiocese	Split
See	Split
Appointed	15 November 1602
Term ended	1624
Predecessor	Ivan Dominik Marcot
Other posts	Bishop of Senj (1600–1602)
Personal details
Birth name	Marko Antun Gospodnetić
Born	1560 Rab, Croatia
Died	1624
Denomination	Roman Catholic

Styles of Markantun de Dominis
Reference style	The Most Reverend
Spoken style	Your Excellency
Religious style	Archbishop

Marco Antonio Dominis (Croatian: Markantun de Dominis, Marko Antun Domnianić) (1560 – September 1624) was a Dalmatian ecclesiastic, Catholic archbishop, adjudged heretic of the Catholic Faith, and man of science.

He was born on the island of Rab (today part of Croatia), off the coast of Dalmatia, in a noble family of Croatian origin. Educated at the Illyrian College at Loreto and at the University of Padua, he entered the Society of Jesus in 1579 and taught mathematics, logic, and rhetoric at Padua and Brescia, Italy.

He was educated by the Jesuits in their colleges at Loreto and Padua and is supposed by some to have joined the Society; the more usual opinion, however, is that he was dissuaded from doing so by Cardinal Aldobrandini. For some time he was employed as a teacher at Verona, a professor of mathematics at Padua, and a professor of rhetoric and philosophy at Brescia.

In 1596 he was, through imperial influence, appointed Bishop of Senj (Segna, Seng) and Modruš in Croatia in August 1600, and transferred in November 1602 to the archiepiscopal see of Split. His endeavours to reform the Church soon brought him into conflict with his suffragans; and the interference of the papal court with his rights as metropolitan, an attitude intensified by the quarrel between the Papacy and Venice, made his position intolerable. This, at any rate, is the account given in his own apology, the Consilium profectionis in which he also states that it was these troubles that led him to those researches into ecclesiastical law, church history, and dogmatic theology, which, while confirming him in his love for the ideal of the true Catholic Church, convinced him that the papal system was far from approximating to it.