Johannes van Santen

Johannes van Santen
Johannes van Santen
Old Catholic Archbishop of Utrecht
Church	Old Catholic Church
Archdiocese	Utrecht
In office	1825-1858
Predecessor	Willibrord van Os
Successor	Henricus Loos
Orders
Consecration	13 November 1825

Johannes van Santen served as the fourteenth

Roman Catholic Church

at that time.

Early Ministry

Before serving as Archbishop of Utrecht, van Santen served as a parish priest in Schiedam.

Archbishop of Utrecht

Two days after the consecration of William Vet as Bishop of Deventer on 12 June 1825, an event that enjoyed the approval of King William I of the Netherlands, the Chapter of Utrecht chose van Santen as bishop-elect. He was consecrated Archbishop of Utrecht in the cathedral of St. Gertrude in Utrecht on 13 November 1825.

Attempt at Reconciliation with the
Roman Catholic Church

In 1827, Archbishop van Santen attended a series of meetings with Monsignor Capaccini, the

Protestant country, their firm adhesion to Rome, the stand they had made against lax casuistry, the carefulness and prudence of the archbishop.” ^[1]

During the second meeting, van Santen refused to sign the

Roman Catholic Church

.

C.B. Moss concludes: “If [van Santen] had accepted the Formulary, and his two suffragans with him, their names would have been acclaimed throughout the Roman Catholic world…as the men who by their submission had healed the ‘

Jansenist schism’; …And yet he would not, for any advantage in this world or the next, declare that to be true which he was quite sure was false. He knew that conscience has a more binding authority than either Pope or Church.” ^[4]

On 4 March 1853

Roman Catholic Church

in 1559. Van Santen, together with Bishop Henricus Johannes van Buul, issued a formal protest against the rival bishops in the sees they already occupied.

Protest of the Immaculate Conception

When

Pius IX, protesting the new dogma on three grounds: that it was contrary to scripture and tradition, that the bishops of the Church had never been consulted about it, and that it was a novel, false doctrine. They appealed this doctrine to a future ecumenical council

of the Church.