If I had to guess, I would guess that any Catholic parish can use any liturgy that is approved for use in any Catholic rite. Thus a parish can use either ordinary form or extraordinary form, and I think the same would apply to approved Eatern liturgies.
Please don’t guess. Faculties to celebrate the sacraments are given by the ordinary of a particular Church for a specific Rite. The OF and EF are both forms of the Roman Rite, and there is very specific legislation concerning permission for the EF. Eastern Churches are all associated with one and only one Rite, unlike the Latin Church in which are found several Rites. A particular Church always celebrates the sacraments in the Rite proper to it. They don’t mix-and-match. A priest might, in unusual cases, be granted bi-ritual faculties in more than one sui iuris Church, but that would typically mean that he physically goes to another parish of another sui iuris Church to celebrate according to the other Rite. The priest would need proficiency and training in the alternate Rite. You just don’t buy a Maronite Rite book and go off and celebrate the liturgy. The architecture of a given building usually lends itself to one particular Rite. A building with the specific features of thr Byzantine Rite would require some modification to celebrate the Roman Rite there, and vice versa.
The Melkites are using it* - October 23 and Sunday after the Nativity.*
Congratulations. I am aware that the Liturgy of St. James is celebrated in the West Antiochene rite, both non-Chalcedonian and Eastern Catholic. However a comment was made pertaining to the Orthodox Church, so I responded specifically about the Orthodox Church.
]Is this a standard usage for Melkites? I ask because the Liturgy of St. James I attended was in Greek. There is a Melkite church not too far from me. I am not sure how much English they use, but if there is a reasonable chance I can experience the Liturgy in English, I’d love too.
Yes, I recall reading that the West Syriac and Byzantine versions have diverged considerable. I seem to recall reading the West Syriac version is very variable, with many changeable and optional portions. I don’t know how accurate that is; it’s been a while since I read about it. The Byzantine version has developed more in-line with other Byzantine liturgies, I believe. Unfortunately, we don’t have any early texts of the Liturgy as it was originally performed, AFAIK.
This is what I mean by a “deeper theological worldview.” I’ve personally noticed two competing descriptions of ad orientem.
So do you mean that the progressives theological stance of ad orientem uses the figurative meaning of the idiom?