Has The Church ever infallibly proclaimed a dogma of a different faith?

[Ben_Sinner]

What I mean is…has there ever been a time where the Church proclaimed a dogma about Chirstianity, while at the same time, unintentionally proclaiming a dogma for another religion?

For example,

Has the Church ever said anything such as “Let it be known that the Christian faith is built around around a merciful God, unlike Islam, where God’s mercy is conditional. Those who think otherwise, let them be anathema.”

(This is obviously an extremely exaggerated example and is not my actual views on Islam)

I ask because this makes me nervous, usually when one religion speaks of another religion’s dogmas, they are usually rebuked by the other religion for “not understanding the full context”

This seems to happen alot in apologietics…I’m just worried it might happen in infallible proclamations, because chances are, they are based on
incomplete truths.

 

[po18guy]

I think, rather, that the Church proclaims what is revealed truth. By contrast, that which is not revealed truth is discernable. Islam, in particular, tells of what it is not almost as much as what it is. It denies that God has a Son, for example. It is clear that there is some truth in all religions, but the percentage varies widely.

 

[porthos11]

What I mean is…has there ever been a time where the Church proclaimed a dogma about Chirstianity, while at the same time, unintentionally proclaiming a dogma for another religion?

For example,

Has the Church ever said anything such as “Let it be known that the Christian faith is built around around a merciful God, unlike Islam, where God’s mercy is conditional. Those who think otherwise, let them be anathema.”

(This is obviously an extremely exaggerated example and is not my actual views on Islam)

I ask because this makes me nervous, usually when one religion speaks of another religion’s dogmas, they are usually rebuked by the other religion for “not understanding the full context”

This seems to happen alot in apologietics…I’m just worried it might happen in infallible proclamations, because chances are, they are based on
incomplete truths.

Until recently, conciliar dogmas have always been in the form of condemnations. They do not use form “Let it be known”, or phrases like “unlike Islam” or “unlike Protestantism” generally, but the heresies themselves. The formular is always:

“Those who say that (insert heresy here) [and not (insert orthodox doctrine here)], A.S.”

So it’s stated as, e.g.

“Those who say that Jesus did not rise from the dead, let them be anathema.”

“Those who say that the Eucharist is merely symbolic and not the Real Presence of the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of OLJC, let them be anathema.”