14
NAAL Proceedings 2022
They also addressed what a working model of such an academy would look like. The initial draft of that model had this flow:
1. Choose a topic or topics for work over the course of a year. 2. Canvass the membership for ideas. 3. Meet annually on the chosen topic(s) 4. Results of small group efforts mailed out in January. 5. Regional meetings to continue this work (February-April) 6. Collect the results of those meetings and collate and disseminate them as the touchstone of the next meeting.
It was proposed that this group would function best at between 100-150 members. And it would work sympathetically and synergistically with other organizations and groups: academies, ecclesial communities, practitioners, and universities. At this point I would like to pause and suggest we consider what these choices and preferences mean in light of the context of material I presented above. First, it appears they are neither trying to improve upon or replace other organizations. Many are already members of Societas Liturgica, as attendance at their conferences is mentioned in correspondence. Gabe Huck and Bob Hovda were both invited to represent the Liturgical Conference. The evidence points to the group supplementing and complementing the work already being done in the area of liturgical renewal, if not being the convening space for the leaders of the many different efforts in liturgical scholarship and liturgical renewal in the U.S. at that time. But it was distinct in other important ways. It was self-described as ecumenical, but would, in fact, become inter-faith with our colleague Rabbi Larry Hoffman invited early on as part of these early conversations and meetings. Further it was mentioned more than a few times that this was not to be a “pressure group.” This was not a place that Philip Schaff would find a home for his agenda. As helpful and important as such agendas may be, this academy was not going to serve as a vehicle for them. This becomes even more clear in later correspondence from Gallen. The Scottsdale meeting resulted in the decision to plan the future of a “national, ecumenical academy for professional liturgists.” To do so, Fr. Gallen organized six regional gatherings to get input on the nature of such a group. The question was raised of who could join. In a letter to the attendees from April of 1974, Gallen wrote: A major question that continually arose was the question of membership, i.e., who should belong to such an academy? This was, of course, another way of asking a question about the very nature and quality of the proposed academy: at what level should it exist, how precisely would it be distinguished from other forms of liturgical apostolate in this country? By way of answer, it was possible to suggest these ideas: a professional liturgist is, first of all, to be defined in terms of the liturgy. Thus, since liturgy is of its nature a complexus of elements (music, architecture,
