The Empty Throne: Reflections on the History and Future of the Orthodox Episcopacy

by Lawrence R. Farley

In contemporary North America, the bishop's throne in the local parish stands empty for most of the year. The bishop is an honored occasional guest rather than a true pastor of the local flock. But it was not always so, nor need it be so forever. Fr. Lawrence Farley explores how the Orthodox episcopacy developed over the centuries and suggests what can be done in modern times to bring the bishop back into closer contact with his flock.

152 pages, Kindle Edition

Published April 12, 2016

About the author

Father Lawrence, born in 1954, completed his M. Div. at Wycliffe College, Toronto School of Theology in 1979. After 6 years in pastoral ministry with the Anglican Church of Canada, he entered the Orthodox Church and completed a Certificate program at St. Tikhon’s Seminary in Pennsylvania and was ordained to the priesthood in 1986. Since 1987 he has served as the pastor St. Herman of Alaska Church in Langley BC, a missionary parish of the OCA (Archdiocese of Canada) founded by local laity, which has since grown to attain regular parish status and purchased its own building. Several priests, deacons, and lay members of new missions have emerged from the membership of St. Herman’s. Fr. Lawrence is the author of the Orthodox Bible Study Companion Series from Conciliar Press, and of a number of other books and articles, and appears in regular weekday podcasts on Ancient Faith Radio. He lives in Surrey B.C. with his family.

Reviews

[Gregory Korbut]

I found this book to be a nice introduction into how the Church has come from Apostolic times, the establishment of the Episcopacy, it's relation to other orders (presbyters and deacons), and its eventual growth from the intimate communities of the early centuries to the present manifestation.

This may be a misread on my part, but I felt a deep lament in the work as the author progressed from the concept of early Bishops as "of the people, by the people, for the people", to one which has become more rigid and distanced in structure, formalized and made more aggrandized, as though this progression has somehow stinted the role of the Episcopacy. I personally do not believe this to be so. It is different for certain, but not damaged or stinted. Has this growth of two millennia harmed Apostolic Tradition or Succession? I would definitely think not.

One point which came across well is that of the accessibility of a Bishop to his diocese in the present; whilst the ancient practice of having a Bishop presiding over every Liturgy and sacramental experience for one given community and living with them all the time is no longer practical, it will do well for the Church going forward to have the diocesan Bishop meet with parishes more frequently, and as Fr. Lawrence put it, not only on those "special" occasions with fanfare and dinners, but for a simple weekend visit, when normal parish services and activities can just resume and the pastor can move amidst his flock. I've heard of stories in my youth where a Bishop visited a small parish and served Vespers as a chanter on the kliros (choir) that evening. It's a beautiful image.

I personally over the last 40 years have witness an enormous change in interactions with Bishops and parishes, most notably in the frequency of visits, but also in the accessibility of the people to their spiritual pastor. This book appears to also reflect this, in the final observations in the "Practical Conclusions" chapter. As a child I would always remember the announcement "Vladyka is coming!" to be met with white faces and fear. I pray this will change, and we will see our Bishops more in a spirit of loving children who miss their earthly father.

[Ted]

I really liked the book's historical overview of the office of the Orthodox bishop and how it has changed, quite radically over time. It is a good critical look at where we are, but the last chapter's suggestions for what to do is somewhat lame for in the end he seems to just accept that despite that fact that the office has undergone tremendous change over time, now we are more or less stuck with what we have as the received tradition and need to try to do our best with it. Seems to me that in fact we don't have to just assume it can't be changed again and we can in fact look at the current historical reality and adapt again. It may be that the office of bishop is not going to change from being a distant administrator, and if that is the case then we have to assume the priest today really is the bishop envisioned in the early church centuries, and the bishop today has been (of necessity?) pushed to a distant administrator of a bigger entity than the local church.