Talk:High Mass

"... it would help to alleviate confusion if the Americans would simply adopt the usage of the other English-speaking countries," says the article. Why then does the article try to force American usage on the other English-speaking countries? Lima 20:42, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

I see that someone has removed from the article the above quotation. However, the question remains: Why impose one country's usage on the rest of the English-speaking world, which has a uniform contrary usage, found also in authoritative works published in the United States?

The out-of-print "source of confusion" quoted in the article can obviously not be consulted where I am - unlike the Catholic Encyclopedia, which follows the general (non-American) English-language usage. The phrase "MANNER OF CELEBRATING HIGH MASS WITHOUT DEACON OR SUB-DEACON", quoted in the article, makes me wonder whether the book uses "High Mass" in a broader sense than the article states. If it speaks here of "High Mass without deacon or sub-deacon" (again, a peculiar usage, for English, of "sub-deacon" rather than "subdeacon"), does it perhaps speak elsewhere of High Mass with deacon and subdeacon, perhaps calling it "Solemn High Mass"? In other words, does it use "High Mass" to mean not Missa Cantata, as the article says, but Mass in which parts of the Ordinary of the Mass are sung, not recited? Lima 05:38, 26 January 2006 (UTC)


 * The two paragraphs of text that were added to the page are not appropriate. This is a disambiguation page, not a page for debate on the American vs. International use of the term "High Mass". The additional text adds no clarification for the reader and therefore should be removed. Dgf32 (talk) 23:50, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Logic
Should "deacon and subdeacon" be "deacon or subdeacon"? -Acjelen 07:17, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Articles themselves answered the question. Changed wording to avoid confusion. -Acjelen 07:21, 16 June 2006 (UTC)