“It translates poorly I think. :)”
Oh, I don’t know. The Latin isn’t that complex. How would you translate this:
“Porro subesse Romano Pontifici omni humanae creaturae declaramus dicimus, definimus et pronunciamus omnino esse de necessitate salutis.”
“In fact it is consistent - if you have a desire to do what God wants you to do, and you die in a state of Grace as a Gift from God that saves you - you have been subject to exactly what every Pope (and every other Bishop) would want for you, a happy death and the Eternal Beatific Vision.”
Well that all sounds very nice, but its not what the Latin of Unam Sanctam says at all.
This Bull really is something of a tar baby for those who insist that no Pope has ever been fallible while declaring “dogma”. Of course, its really nothing more than a rehash of the 11th century Dictatus Papae of Gregory VII. The politics surrounding its issuance, Boniface VIII’s condemnation as a heretic by a council of bishops and archbishops and his death soon thereafter on account of embarrassment it is claimed, make for a somewhat less than spiritually inspiring backdrop for this unfortunate and innovative “dogma” of the Latin Church.
His condemnation was bogus.
However, Unam Sanctam needs to be understood in its historical context: as a harsh rebuke to a (self-professed) Catholic king, Phillip the Fair. It's not addressing the salvation of non-Catholics (non-Christians, whatever).
Pretty good discussion of all of these issues here.
Well, that isn’t how they view things now.
Which is odd in an of itself.