Jung writes that: "Feeling is distinguished from affect by the fact that it produces no perceptible physical innervations, i.e., neither more nor less than an ordinary thinking process." Thus, even if he didn't consider feelings as mystical and sacred (yes that was most probably an overgeneralization on my part), he certainly considered them as non-physical and different from emotions ("affect"). Which, if nothing else, is plainly incorrect. He also certainly considered intuition as a means of accessing the "mystical and sacred," so there's that. All in all, singling out "feeling" and "intuition" as cognitive functions was very selective and shortsighted, dare I say biased, on his part to say the least.

As for archetypes -- Jung definitely considered them as a kind of Platonic universals. And again, that is demonstrably false.

And mind you, I speak with conviction that seems to you inappropriate only because all of what I say can be observed when meditating and/or doing psychedelics. Moreover, modern neurobiology further validates those observations. Put in the necessary work and you, too, can be what you call "ultimate authority" :D