Such faux relevance will indeed tend toward irrelevance on the enduring issues. I say that not from deep knowledge of GOA history, but from 40 years of observing the entropy of Church hierarchies generally.

Why is it that every Orthodox leader is clear (and compassionate) on this issue except Patriarch Bartholomew, Archbishop Demetrios, and the Metropolitans of the GOA? Is it fear of offending the pro-abortion politico’s? What happens when Sen. Snowe and cohorts start writing policy for, say, euthanasia (not a far-fetched idea if Obama’s desire to nationalize health care takes hold)? Do they remain silent there as well? Most likely, yes. They said nothing about Sens. Snowe’s and Sarbannes support of partial birth abortion, so there no reason to believe they will muster the moral courage their office requires when the challenges get even harder.

I wish Bp. Savas well, but I fear that like so many efforts to engage culture in the GOA, topics will be elevated that skirt around, and ultimately sublimate, the important issues, and no question that challenges the policy of the Greekification of the GOA will be tolerated.

I have come to the same conclusion John made above: All the current talk about “Hellenism” doesn’t really concern the theological and philosophical contribution of the ancients to Orthodoxy Christianity. Rather, in the present context, “Hellenism” is a euphemism that justifies the political and economic interest of the Greek State and their partners (that’s why the concept of “diaspora” is important). Tying it into the legacy of Hellenism — a gambit made apparent by the most recent incantation that posits Hellenism alongside Orthodoxy (“Hellenism and Orthodoxy,” – contra the Cappadocians)* — is historical revisionism** of the first order. Call it the Megali Idea of the Second Millennium.

Maybe this is why we are seeing such poor leadership, at least in areas that matter.

*The Cappadocians of course synthesized Hellenistic and Orthodox thought. All Orthodox Christians are “Hellenized” regardless of jurisdiction or country of origin. Hellenism was “resolved” in Orthodoxy in other words, thus the current claim that a Hellenism exists alongside Orthodoxy (“Hellenism and Orthodoxy”) doesn’t speak of historical Hellenism, but something else.

**This historical revisionism posits two tracks; trace them backwards and one ends up in Jerusalem, and the other at Mt. Olympus. Thus, we need to ask: does distinction between “Hellenism” and “Orthodoxy” (historically artificial), in fact aid and abet the forces of secularism?