The document “Diuturno usu” of John XXIII proclaims that long-standing diplomatic practice has shown the “great advantages” of formal relations between the Apostolic See and nations, presenting such ties as instruments for peace and “true progress,” and on this basis erects an Apostolic Internunciature to the Republic of Turkey with its seat in Constantinople, granting it all privileges proper to such papal legations. It is a concise juridical text in which John XXIII, invoking “Apostolic power,” solemnly binds the Holy See into a stable framework of public friendship with a state that officially rejects the Kingship of Christ, divine law, and the rights of the Church.
Conciliar Diplomacy Enthroned: The Internunciature to Turkey as Programmatic Apostasy
Direct Usurpation and the Perverted Foundations of “Diuturno usu”
From the outset this act stands under a double indictment.
1. On the personal level:
– John XXIII is the inaugurator of the conciliar line of usurpers; his entire trajectory, from the calling of Vatican II to his ecumenical-humanist agenda, manifests rupture with the *integral* Roman doctrine solemnly articulated, for example, in the *Syllabus Errorum* of Pius IX and the anti-Modernist magisterium of St. Pius X. A man publicly promoting condemned theses cannot be the Roman Pontiff; *manifest heresy ipso facto severs one from the body of the Church* (cf. Bellarmine as cited in “Defense of Sedevacantism,” and Canon 188.4 of the 1917 Code).
– Therefore, the appeal in “Diuturno usu” to “Apostolic power” is a usurpation. *Quod nullum est, nullum producit effectum* (what is null produces no effect). This alone suffices to deny any binding force to the act except as a symptom and confession of the conciliar sect’s program.
2. On the objective doctrinal-political level:
– The document praises in general terms the “public relationships” between the Apostolic See and nations as sources of peace and progress:
“The long-standing practice has confirmed that great advantages arise from the public relations of offices which exist between this Apostolic See and Nations; since such relations greatly avail to secure the goods of peace and to attain true progress worthy of the name.”
– This language is not in itself novel as formula, but here it is applied to the explicit project of forging “public bonds of friendship” with the laicist, Masonic-inspired Turkish Republic, formally built upon the repudiation of the public reign of Christ the King, the overthrow of Christendom, and the subjugation of the Church.
– Thus “Diuturno usu” is not a neutral diplomatic note. It is a juridical self-insertion of the usurping conciliar structure into an order that Pius IX and Leo XIII unmasked as the work of the *synagoga Satanae* – the masonic-secularist assault on the rights of Christ and His Church.
From the perspective of *integral Catholic faith*, this act reveals its own bankruptcy: it substitutes supernatural mission with naturalistic diplomacy, recognizes in practice the creed of laicism condemned in the *Syllabus* (especially 55: “The Church ought to be separated from the State, and the State from the Church”), and offers the prestige of the Apostolic See to legitimize a regime that systematically excludes Christ from public life, directly contradicting Pius XI’s *Quas Primas*.
Factual Level: Masking Subjugation as “Public Friendship”
The very choice of partner and context unmasks the sophistry:
– The Republic of Turkey, heir of the Kemalist revolution, is:
– Formally secularist, hostile to any claim of the Church to public rights.
– Built upon the extirpation of the last forms of Catholic-friendly imperial symbolism present, however imperfectly, in the old Ottoman order.
– A state in which the Catholic presence is marginal, deprived of social kingship of Christ, constrained by laws and mentalities that deny the exclusive truth of the Catholic religion.
Yet “Diuturno usu” speaks only of:
– “Public bonds of friendship.”
– “Peace.”
– “True progress.”
There is not:
– One word about the obligation of nations to recognize Christ as King.
– One affirmation that civil legislation must be conformed to divine and natural law.
– One reminder that false religions are objectively violations of the First Commandment.
– One warning against Freemasonry and the Masonic-laicist ideology which, as Pius IX clearly teaches in the appended text of the *Syllabus* and related allocutions, is at the root of modern secular states—including those that glory in the Turkish model.
This silence is not accidental; it is programmatic. It contradicts:
– Pius XI, *Quas Primas*: peace cannot exist where Christ does not reign publicly; rulers must acknowledge and obey Christ’s law in the civil order. Pius XI explicitly links social apostasy with the disasters of the modern world and commands public recognition of Christ’s Kingship as remedy.
– Pius IX, *Syllabus*: the system of indifferentist, secular states, arrogating to themselves the right to define or suppress the Church’s rights, is condemned as an error opposed to Catholic doctrine.
– St. Pius X, *Pascendi* and *Lamentabili*: naturalistic reduction of the Church’s mission and adaptation to modern political forms that deny supernatural truth are signatures of Modernism, the “synthesis of all heresies.”
To present, therefore, as “true progress” the insertion of the “Holy See” into a friendship pact with a regime that institutionalizes these condemned principles is to reverse the Catholic criterion itself. It is an inversion: the Church is no longer judge of states; the conciliar sect places itself as chaplain of laicist powers.
Linguistic Level: Anesthetizing Rhetoric and Technocratic Formalism
The vocabulary of “Diuturno usu” is chilling in its smooth emptiness, a paradigmatic instance of conciliar technocratic religion:
– The text revolves around:
– “Utilitates” (advantages),
– “Pacis bona” (goods of peace),
– “Profectum” (progress),
– “Publicis amicitiae vinculis” (public bonds of friendship).
Missing are:
– *Gratia*, *fides*, *Regnum Christi*, *veritas unica et absoluta*, the supernatural end of man, the rights of the Church as a perfect society founded by Christ.
Instead, the inner logic is:
– Relations as instruments of “peace and progress” in a purely horizontal sense.
– The Church (or, in fact, the conciliar paramasonic structure) as diplomatic actor among others, governed by the categories of “public friendship” and bureaucratic privileges.
This shift in language is itself doctrinal:
– *Lex orandi, lex credendi; lex scribendi, lex credendi* (the law of prayer, and likewise of writing, is the law of belief). When official acts consistently omit the supernatural order and exalt generic humanistic ideals, they catechize apostasy.
– The expression “true progress” is left undefined, disconnected from submission to Christ and His law. This mirrors the condemned proposition 80 of the *Syllabus*: that the Roman Pontiff can and should reconcile himself with “progress, liberalism, and modern civilization” understood as autonomous from Christ.
The juridical formulae at the end:
– “Firmas, validas atque efficaces,”
– “Plenos atque integros effectus,”
– “Irritumque ex nunc et inane…”
are classical chancery language – but now mobilized to secure, not the rights of the Church against secular usurpation, but the installation of a legation fully adapted to a secular, anti-Christian framework. The style thus becomes the mask of inversion: the ancient solemn form is emptied and pressed into the service of a new, opposed content.
Theological Level: Betrayal of the Kingship of Christ and the Rights of the Church
Measured against pre-1958 Catholic doctrine, “Diuturno usu” collapses.
1. The Kingship of Christ denied in practice
Pius XI teaches in *Quas Primas*:
– Societies and rulers sin gravely if they refuse public homage and obedience to Christ.
– Social apostasy is the root of wars, disorder, and moral collapse.
– The task of Catholics and of the Church is to recall states to the yoke of Christ, not to confirm them in laicist pride.
Yet in this act:
– A “Holy See” presided over by a usurper extends to the Turkish Republic all the marks of normal, legitimate friendship and mutual recognition.
– There is no condition, no admonition, no doctrinal clarity, only a serene acceptance of a state constitutionally closed to the public law of Christ.
– This tacitly affirms the very proposition condemned by Pius IX (55): that Church and State ought to be separated.
This is not mere prudence of dealing with hostile powers. It is theologically framed approval: the act grounds itself in an ideology of neutrality wherein the supernatural claims of Christ are silenced, subordinated to “peaceful coexistence.”
2. The Church’s divine constitution relativized
The text’s core phrase:
– “Apostolicam Sedem et Turcarum Rempublicam publicis amicitiae vinculis inter se coniungi”
(“that the Apostolic See and the Republic of Turkey be bound together by public bonds of friendship”)
presents the relationship as symmetrical: two subjects in a profane order, linked by diplomacy. But the true Church, in the teaching of Leo XIII, Pius IX, Pius XI:
– Is a perfect society with rights preceding and superior to the state in matters of religion and morality.
– Cannot treat as doctrinally indifferent whether a state acknowledges or denies Christ.
To normalize as “friendship” an order erected upon the rejection of the Church’s rights is to undermine the doctrine that the temporal power is obligated *propter Deum* to aid the Church and favor the true religion. In effect, “Diuturno usu” erases the qualitative difference between nations that respect the Church and those that persecute or exclude her; both are merely “nations” with which the Vatican apparatus seeks “advantages” and “peace.”
This attitude aligns with:
– The condemned laicist notion that civil authority alone defines the Church’s space and that the Church must adapt. Pius IX explicitly repudiates the idea that ecclesiastical liberty derives from civil concession (propositions 19, 26, 30).
3. The supernatural mission eclipsed by diplomacy
The entire document is devoid of:
– Any mention of the salvation of souls (*salus animarum suprema lex*).
– Any call to conversion of Turkey to the Catholic faith.
– Any reference to the necessity of the one true Church for salvation.
– Any denunciation of Islam or laicism as objective errors endangering souls.
This absence is the decisive “text.” Where pre-1958 Popes, even in diplomatic acts, organically presupposed and often recalled the supernatural end of all political order and the unique rights of the Church, here the “Holy See” behaves as one NGO among others, whose mission is to foster mutual understanding with anti-Christian states.
Such naturalistic reduction is explicitly branded by St. Pius X as Modernism:
– *Pascendi* exposes the tendency to reinterpret the Church as a religious-ethical factor inside a pluralistic society, abandoning doctrinal exclusivity.
– *Lamentabili* condemns the notion that revelation and dogma are subservient to historical-political evolution.
“Diuturno usu” stands as a concise illustration: the conciliar structure self-defines in the categories of international relations, not of supernatural sovereignty of Christ.
Symptomatic Level: A Keystone in the Conciliar Program of Apostate Ecumenical Humanism
This letter may appear minor; it is, in reality, emblematic.
1. Rehabilitation of Constantinople against the memory of Catholic Rome
By placing the Internunciature at Constantinople (Istanbul), “Diuturno usu”:
– Symbolically recenters the conciliar apparatus toward a space dominated by:
– The legacy of schismatic Orthodoxy,
– The triumph of Islam and laicism over the last remnants of Christian empire.
– Fits seamlessly with John XXIII’s ecumenical orientation: softening the claims of Rome, seeking “dialogue” with schismatics and infidels without prior call to complete conversion.
This move resonates ominously with elements noted in the “False Fatima Apparitions” file:
– The exploitation of geopolitical tensions as a stage for ecumenical and political engineering.
– The rebranding of the Church as a facilitator of East–West détente, rather than herald of exclusive truth and judge of error.
2. Institutionalizing submission to masonic-laicist powers
Pius IX, in the appended section, unmasks the Masonic sects and liberal states as animated by the “synagogue of Satan,” whose aim is to enslave and destroy the Church. He laments governments that trample ecclesiastical liberty by law, declaring such laws “null and void because absolutely contrary to the divine constitution of the Church.”
In radical contrast, “Diuturno usu”:
– Never names Freemasonry, laicism, or the anti-Christian character of the Turkish constitutional order.
– Treats this regime as a normal partner whose framework is implicitly accepted.
This is the inversion:
– Where Pius IX invalidates anti-Catholic laws in the name of divine constitution,
– John XXIII’s apparatus validates anti-Catholic regimes by integrating itself as a compliant partner.
The conciliar sect’s ostentatious diplomacy thus serves:
– To neutralize in practice the very condemnations of the 19th–early 20th century Magisterium.
– To catechize Catholics into accepting as normal—and even “progressive”—what the Church has branded as structural iniquity.
3. Preparation for Vatican II and global religious relativism
“Diuturno usu” (1960) occurs on the eve of Vatican II. Its principles prefigure:
– The post-conciliar cult of “dialogue” with non-Catholic religions, including Islam, treated as legitimate partners in “building peace.”
– The doctrinally perverse teaching on “religious freedom,” turning the state’s indifference or hostility to the true religion into a supposed right, contrary to the prior magisterium.
– The transformation of the “Holy See” into the nervous system of a neo-church whose sacraments (where simulated) are emptied and whose liturgy is reconfigured into a communal humanistic rite.
The internunciature to Turkey is one brick in this edifice: an outwardly modest, inwardly programmatic confession that the conciliar structure chooses coexistence and recognition over mission and Kingship; that it prefers the table of nations to the throne of Christ.
Exposure of the Underlying Errors: From Naturalism to Practical Indifferentism
Summarizing the doctrinal and spiritual bankruptcies manifested:
– Naturalistic pacifism:
– Peace is presented as fruit of diplomatic technique, not of submission to Christ the King. This contradicts Pius XI, who insists that “the peace of Christ in the Kingdom of Christ” alone is true peace.
– Implicit religious indifferentism:
– No distinction between a Catholic confessional order and a laicist Islamic-secular regime; both are treated as morally equivalent partners.
– This undermines the dogma that the Catholic Church is the only ark of salvation and the only religion that can claim the obedience of states.
– Acceptance of condemned liberal principles:
– By treating the Turkish secular order as legitimate without qualification, the act validates proposition 80 of the *Syllabus*, the reconciliation of the “Pope” with liberal modern civilization conceived apart from Christ.
– Subversion of ecclesiology:
– The Church is reduced to a subject of international law among others, abandoning in practice her identity as the divinely constituted, societally sovereign Mystical Body with inalienable rights.
– Pedagogical apostasy through silence:
– The most damning feature is what is not said: no mention of baptism, the Most Holy Sacrifice, the state of grace, judgment, hell, or the necessity of conversion for Turks. Silence where the faith demands proclamation is itself betrayal.
Reasserting the Pre-1958 Catholic Criterion Against the Conciliar Sect
Against the ideology of “Diuturno usu” one must restate, succinctly, the perennial Catholic principles:
– Unum ovile, unus pastor (one fold, one shepherd):
– There is and can be only one true Church; diplomatic acts must never obscure the obligation of nations and individuals to enter her.
– Regnum Christi publicum et sociale:
– Christ’s Kingship is not a private sentiment but a juridical and social claim. States are bound in conscience to recognize His law publicly; to refuse this is sin.
– Ecclesia societas perfecta:
– The Church, as a perfect society, has intrinsic rights, not granted by the state. Laws contrary to these rights are null before God.
– Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus rightly understood:
– Any policy that suggests that living in false religions or laicist orders is spiritually sufficient is implicitly heretical.
By these standards, “Diuturno usu” reveals itself as:
– A juridical artifact of the conciliar sect, not an act of the Roman Pontiff.
– A localized but crystalline expression of the new religion: diplomatic humanism, doctrinal silence, praise of laicist regimes, and effective denial of Christ’s social rights.
Therefore, it must be rejected in toto by those who adhere to the integral Catholic faith. Any “nunciature” or “internunciature” erected on such principles does not represent the spotless Bride of Christ but the “Church of the New Advent,” the paramasonic occupier seated in the Vatican, which uses ancient forms to promote a new, anti-Catholic substance.
Source:
Diuturno usu, Litterae Apostolicae Internuntiatura Apostolica in Turcarum Republica erigitur, d. 29 m. Februarii a. 1960, Ioannes PP. XXIII (vatican.va)
Date: 11.11.2025