The short answer is “yes”.
We know that when you change liturgical texts, you change the belief of the people. It takes a while, but it happens. You know the adage “lex orandi lex credendi“.
So, Edward Pentin has a piece today at the National Catholic Register:
Much stress is being put on the fact that a change of doctrine is not up for discussion. But concerns remain that, even if that is the case, changing how the Church is presented will make it appear to have been altered.
The issue of language is a case in point: synod participants heard today of a wish to tone down the use of terms such as “living in sin”, “contraceptive mentality” and “intrinsically disordered”. The suggestion appeared to have been warmly received.
But such a change risks making it seem that the Church no longer believes, at least as strongly as she once did, the truths she is compelled to teach. It’s a concern that’s yet to be raised at the synod. Or maybe it has been. [Since the Synod is so closed, it would be hard to find out.]
Words have meanings. When you start playing around with words, you risk changing the concepts.
That said, in all seriousness, are there better ways to say:
- “living in sin”
- “intrinsically disordered”
We have to stipulate that language you use in a scholarly article is not the same as you use in a sermon or in a coffee shop.
If there are better ways to express these things, without vastly long circumlocutions or vague euphemisms, I’d like to know what they are so that I can use them.