Talk:Unam sanctam

message: Following custom, the premises are not based on logical reasoning, but on allegorical interpretations of images in scripture, drawn from the Hebrew bible as well as the New Testament. The bull is brief, and anyone interested in it should read what survives of the original text (see links).
I have removed the text quoted above, because I found the "Following custom"-part rather offensive (and no, I'm not a Catholic), and I would like to request that someone does an NPOV-check on the rest of the article. -- ABoerma 01:26, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please see Allegory in the Middle Ages, it was more than customary. Perhaps "not based on logical reasoning" could be removed since that is a modernism, comparing them to us, which is of no relevance. -- Stbalbach 03:05, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, I read it as "Catholic custom". I'll try to slightly clarify it, though. -- ABoerma 12:41, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Catholic is correct. What other religion was there? Who else was issuing Bulls? -- Stbalbach 23:18, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "What other religion was there?"  Judaism was represented in mediaeval Europe; so was Islam; so, too, the Greek church, from which the Roman had broken off.  (Of course, if "Stbalbach" employed "Catholic" in a strict sense, the Church universal rather than just the Roman Catholic denomination, there'd have been only Christians and a few Jews and Moslems, and fewer pagans and eccentrics, in mediaeval western and central Europe.)  "Who else was issuing Bulls?"  True, only the bishops of Rome, as heads of the Roman church.  Firstorm (talk) 14:50, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV 

message: I have restored some text silently suppressed and reverted some insertions as follows:
*"...which some historians consider one of the most extreme statements of Papal spiritual supremacy." "Some" was entered and has been deleted. A historian who does not consider Unam Sanctam one of the most extreme statements of Papal spiritual supremacy should by all means be quoted, if one can be found. There must be some Catholic apologia that takes such an extreme view. Let us hear it quoted. Meanwhile the sentence follows the historical mainstream.
*"Following medieval custom, the premises 'are not based on logical reasoning, but on allegorical interpretations..." Deleting the bolded phrase distorts the point, which is intrinsically interesting and essential to understanding the medieval world-view. "Not based on logical reasoning" is not a modernism, nor does it compare anything to "us", but simply parses the characteristic medieval method of thought, exemplified in a quote.
*"Unam Sanctum often refers to "the one and one and holy". It just doesn't. --Wetman 05:54, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Restorations

message: ...As found on here:
Unam Sanctum in English
"Urged by faith, we are obliged to believe and to maintain that the Church is one, holy, catholic, and also apostolic.  We believe in her firmly and we confess with simplicity that outside of her there is neither salvation nor the remission of sins..."
and also, in Wikipedia Commons, as linked on the article itself, which appears to be the more literal:
"WE ARE COMPELLED, OUR FAITH URGING us, to believe and to hold—and we do firmly believe and simply confess—that there is one holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, outside of which there is neither salvation nor remission of sins..."
and in Latin:
"Unam sanctam ecclesiam catholicam et ipsam apostolicam urgente fide credere cogimur et tenere, nosque hanc frmiter credimus et simpliciter confitemur, extra quam nec salus est, nec remissio peccatorum..."
--Midnite Critic 00:37, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Translation of First Sentence 

message: This article would benefit from a short paragraph on the relevance of this Papal Bull today.  Do modern Popes still firmly assert that there is no salvation apart from that of Rome?  Or have they, in any way repudiated this Bull ?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Substar (talk • contribs) 20:24, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with this anonymous commentator:  a few sentences on the attitude of the Roman church today toward this doctrine would help the reader to place the entire subject into relevant context.  Firstorm (talk) 15:29, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:   Modern Interpretation/Relevance  

message: In his 1880 translation of ecclesiastic sagas/tales from Icelandic to German (Islendzk Aeventyri by Hugo Gering), he attempts to verify points and sources related to Pope Boniface VIII and his "Auseinandersetzung" with cardinals Peter and Jacob in the notes following [Chapter XXII]http://www.archive.org/stream/rsislendzkaevent00geriuoft#page/69/mode/1up. One such source is an earlier edition of Gesta Treverorum (later German sources are at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gesta_Treverorum). I hope this is useful.
Webistrator (talk) 04:08, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:   Possible Clarification/Verification Source in "Gesta Treverorum"  

message: The following  was  but not supported on the cited page. –BoBoMisiu (talk) 02:09, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tierney paraphrase