Reason 21

21. Because the narrative manner of the Consecration in the New Mass infers that it is only a memorial and not a true sacrifice (Protestant thesis). (Bolding in the original).


I think it would be good to point out here that the idea that any given idea is a ‘Protestant’ one generally does not hold true. Almost any belief can be found somewhere in the Protestant system. This fact has no bearing on the validity of the argument, but is rather a worthwhile thing to remember.

This question seems to read into the words of the Liturgy more than is there. It is true that in each Eucharistic prayer there is a phrase, after the Consecration, calling the Mass a memorial, which, strictly speaking, it is (but not only). Christ commands us to “do them in remembrance of me,” making the action inherently a memorial.

The follow up idea that the New Mass infers no sacrifice is absurd, as in the selfsame sentence which mentions the memorial there is reference to offering or sacrifice. No Protestant performing a memorialist Eucharist would dare suggest they are offering the bread and wine in any way, shape or form.

It must be noted that the aspect of the sacrifice is slightly muted in the current English translation, but that is being rectified with the revised translation due out shortly (liturgically speaking). In the end, the New Mass still strongly carries the idea of the Sacrifice of the Mass and in no way endorses a Memorial Only or Memorial Primarily interpretation without doing serious dishonor to the text.