This is a question (or questions) rather than an answer. What is the Eastern view of the relationship between the priesthood and the episcopacy? I know precious little about the Western view, only a few scraps I learned in grammar school or high school (and never had any particular reason to pursue).
We did learn that the episcopacy is the "fullness" of the priesthood/Holy Orders. I'm constrained, however, to add "Whatever that means." Priests are ordained in Holy Orders; there's no further sacrament to make a bishop.
In the Western Church, at least in my experience, the bishop is the ordinary minister of Confirmation, but a priest can be "delegated" (if that's the word I want) to confer Confirmation. (I don't know whether it can happen that a priest can be delegated to consecrate a bishop.) But I have a dim memory from childhoold of hearing that the Eastern Church (some of it?) typically gives Baptism, the Eucharist and Confirmation to infants at the same time. Does the bishop do all this (assuming what I heard was correct)?
Just curious about the implications of all this.
“What is the Eastern view of the relationship between the priesthood and the episcopacy?”
The priest is the “celebrant” at the Liturgy and is the bishop’s representative in the parish. The authority to have the Divine Liturgy conducted in a parish is represented by the antemision. The bishop has total authority over the priest.
“But I have a dim memory from childhoold of hearing that the Eastern Church (some of it?) typically gives Baptism, the Eucharist and Confirmation to infants at the same time. Does the bishop do all this (assuming what I heard was correct)?”
If a bishop baptizes a person, the bishop will likely also chrismate that person and give him or her first communion. Ordinarily, all three sacraments are administered at the same time and by a parish priest and in the usual case this is done in infancy.