/lit/ - Literature

>>9272549
So the goal posts are being moved from
>universally refuted
to
>Well, I don't like that one, and that king isn't as popular as his dad
?

>>9136529
This?
AGAIN?!
These are not in conflict, as any $4 book on apologetics can tell you.
The catechism refers to the concept of 'invincible ignorance' which means if you have no way of knowing the truth but strive for it anyway have a chance, albeit small, of heaven.
>Kid born in a North Korean concentration camp. Never hears anything about Christ
>Spends his entire life helping and loving others, being just, honest, and brave. Despises selfishness, evil, and all sin.
>He might have a chance at Heaven
.............
Unam Sanctam is a repetition of 'extra ecclesiam nulla salus' but this does NOT mean, and was never taught as meaning, that people not visibly Catholic are extra ecclesiam! The doctrine of invincible ignorance was part and parcel of the original formulation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus in the 3rd and 4th Centuries, a millennia before Unam Santam was written!
Protip: Pope Boniface was familiar witht he details, as were those who read Unam Sanctam.
What you are doing is thinking Unam Sanctam was about extra ecclesiam nulla salus when its focus was *actually* plenitudo potestatis!

>>8935541
Will your anima attempt to influence me via the collective unconscious via synchronistic events to conclude that if I were to grasp the sacred marriage between sun and moon I could grasp his in-depth knowledge of alchemy?