Earlier today I posted some reflections on what is being called The Gunn Rule. After my post I passed my reflections along to Susan Russell and was glad to see her respond. She made some great points – as she says she stands firmly on the other side of the Gunn Rule. So it go me thinking. Is there some middle ground between the Gunn Rule and Susan Russell’s stance? We are Anglicans after all, there has to be a via media.
So in a tongue and cheek way I’m calling this the Tavolaro Compromise. I wonder what it would look like if every political resolution that requires General Convention to take a stance, included a resolve calling us to some sort of direct action. For example (this is not an actual resolution) if resolution D370 calls General Convention to send a letter to the President to call for an end to hunger it should also include a resolve challenging each diocese to double the number of hours worked to end hunger in the next triennium.
I wonder what effect this model would have on what we do? What it would mean to combine social justice advocacy and mission? How much more powerful would our letters to global and domestic leaders be if we put our money where our mouth is and stepped and worked for the same things we are calling them to work for and do?