Reasons not to be Eastern Orthodox #237: "Aerial Toll Houses"

It's not just an individual Church Father. Do you think it is possible for the whole Church to be in error, and if so, what if they are in error with regard to what is Scripture? You are on the same footing as the Jehovah's Witnesses if the historic teachings of the Church carry no special weight.

 

I'll quote Stephen Shoemaker over at Public Orthodoxy, who has written on the subject:

"I think it is hard to dispute that a single mention in the Life of Anthony, similar references in two pious tales from Egypt, and a more extended discussion of the toll houses in a later homily falsely ascribed to Cyril of Alexandria fails dramatically to meet Vincent’s criteria for orthodoxy. In the first millennium, as far as we can tell, belief in the aerial toll houses was limited to a few individuals, in Egypt, in only a handful of instances. Accordingly, this belief must be regarded as an opinion, even if a sometimes popular one in particular times and places, rather than a fundamental element of the Orthodox Christian faith."

https://publicorthodoxy.org/2017/10/17/toll-houses-review/

If we were discussing "the historic teachings of the Church", your objection might carry some weight. What we are in fact discussing is a debate internal to Eastern Orthodoxy, with your position being the minority one. I'm not sure what Jehovah's Witnesses have to do with anything, but the premodern conflation of the physical and spiritual worlds presupposed by the aerial toll house mythology actually makes Eastern Orthodoxy sound a lot like Mormonism.

 

The historic teachings of the Church carry awesome weight of course. But as Lancelot Andrews teaches, one faith, two testaments, three creeds, four gospels, and first five centuries of the Church mark the bounds of our faith. So as you go later into church history, we would argue that those testimonies have less and less relevance in helping us interpret the one God-breathed source of revelation, namely the Scriptures themselves. Thus we would argue that after the 5th century, we don't use the term "Fathers" but rather just "church theologians" or "thinkers".

And even the Fathers, the holy men like St. Cyril and St. Ambrose, have no unique prerogative of inspiration; a stone inscription might give us as much help in understanding Scripture as might a homily from a church father (of the first 5 centuries).

That being said, there are numerous passages from both the fathers and more importantly Scripture itself, which seem to contradict the idea that our souls will be judged by demons, in the sky.

2 Timothy 4:1-8:
-"I have finished the race, I have kept the faith. Finally, there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, will give to me on that Day."


The Nicene Creed:
-“And He will come again with glory to judge the living and dead. His kingdom shall have no end.”


St. John Chrysostom, Homily on Lazarus II:
-“For if while the soul dwells in the body the devil cannot bring violence about it, clearly when it departs from the body, he likewise has no power over it.”


The Life of Saint Anthony:
-“We ought not to fear the demons or even Satan himself, for he is a liar and speaks not a word of truth…and with him are placed the demons, his fellows, like serpents and scorpions to be trodden underfoot by us Christians.”
-“But if the demons had power not even against the swine, much less have they any over men formed in the image of God. So then we ought to fear God only, and despise the demons, and be in no fear of them.”

 

It's not just a few isolated quotes. Even Stephen Shoemaker concedes:

"In the contest of angels and demons over the newly departed soul, then, the monks have admittedly identified a vibrant tradition that reaches back into the ancient church and has been witnessed by many authorities – in contrast with the aerial toll houses."

The problem is that Stephen Shoemaker doesn't realize that the contest of angels of demons over the newly departed soul is precisely what the Toll Houses are an image of. The book he supposedly is reviewing in that piece, but clearly hasn't actually read, is 1111 pages of documentation from Scripture, Fathers, the lives of Saints, the Services of the Church, and Iconography. He makes no attempt to actually engage the evidence that this book presents, he simply dismisses it with a waive of the hand. https://fatherjohn.blogspot.com/2019/05/more-on-question-of-toll-houses.html

 

You are simply cherry picking a few proof texts, and ignoring the actual evidence. The fact that Christ will come to judge the living and the dead does not mean that angels and demons have no role in escorting the soul to the place where they await that judgment. In the parable of the rich man and Lazarus, we are explicitly told that the angels escorted the soul of Lazarus to the Bosom of Abraham, and in the parable of the Rich Fool, we are told that God said to the rich fool, "Tonight *they* will require thy soul of thee." And Blessed Theophylact comments on that verse as follows: "Notice also the words "they will require". Like some stern imperial officers demanding tribute, the fearsome angels will ask for your souls, and you will not want to give it because you love this life and claim the things of this life as your own. But they do not demand the soul of a righteous man, because he himself commits his soul into the hands of God and Father of spirits, and he does so with joy and gladness, not in the least bit grieved that he is handing over his soul to God. For him the body is only a light burden, easily shed. But the sinner has made his soul fleshy, something difficult to separate from the body. This is why the soul must be demanded of him, the same way that harsh tax collectors treat debtors who refuse to pay what is due. See that the Lord did not say, "I shall require thy soul of thee," but, "they shall require"" (The Explanation of the Holy Gospel According to Luke. Fr. Christopher Stade, Trans. (House Springs, MO: Chrysostom Press, 1997), p. 148).

 

The fact remains that none of those people had any more idea of what happens after death than people living today. It's idle speculation. And we've long since moved on from Ptolemaic cosmology where "heaven" is some physical place beyond the spheres. Even if the teaching were universal (and it isn't), that by itself would be no warrant for accepting it today. I don't see how the toll house mythology can ultimately be productive of anything other than superstition.

 

On what basis do you assert that the Saints have no idea of what happens after death? And given that Scripture explicitly tells us that angels do escort the souls of the righteous, and the souls of the wicked are demanded by a group of entities referred to by the plural "they," what these saints tell us is supported by Scripture.

You are essentially an empiricist with a little bit of God slapped on top. That is not the worldview you find in Scripture.

 

It's very simple: I assert it on the basis that they weren't dead when they wrote what they did.

 

So the point of toll-houses is merely to decide on the place of waiting, until Judgment? Like if at toll-house #15, there isn't enough to keep me with the angels, and the devils carry me away; the place I go to will just be temporary? I could hypothetically land in hell for a spell, but then after all could be judged to go out of there and go to heaven?

We have 7-15 scripture commentaries from the Fathers on that passage (by the Anglican definition, the first 5 centuries), and not one of them makes the connection with aerial toll houses.

The problem is that Theophylact lived a cool one thousand years after the Scriptures had been written. Therefore he wouldn't have any more insight into what it meant, than you or I or a faithful scholar of today. But as for the Church Fathers of the patristic era, there isn't a single one who makes the connection that he did, to aerial toll-houses.

Once you see how stringent are our requirements of who counts as a church father who is allowed to substantially add to our understanding of Scripture, you'll see that that bar is impossibly high; the last people who could've crossed it have died one thousand five-hundred years ago. A hieromonk who was inspired with a light above his head in the 800s AD, or 1200s AD, unfortunately is long beyond the pale. All of the substantial originators of the toll-houses idea are folks like,:

-Theophylact (ca. 1050/60-ca. 1108)
-Basil the Younger (900s)
-John Climacus (600-700s)

 

St . Paul wasn't dead when he was taken up into heaven. Was he a liar?

 

You clearly have a skewed understanding of what the Toll House image points to. It is simply one of many ways that the saints and fathers speak of this phenomenon. Do you think the idea that angels carry away the souls of the righteous is a myth? If not, why would it be a problem if demons carry away the souls of the wicked?

Blessed Theophylact is hardly the only Father or saint to comment on this phenomenon. There is a 1111 page book that catalogues such references, and they are found throughout the Fathers... not just a handful. https://www.amazon.com/Departure-According-Teaching-Orthodox-Church/dp/1945699000

St. Justin Martyr would probably count as an early Father, I would think, and in his "Dialogue with Trypho", he says:
“And what follows of the Psalm, -- ‘But Thou, Lord, do not remove Thine assistance from me; give heed to help me. Deliver my soul from the sword, and my only-begotten from the hand of the dog; save me from the lion’s mouth, and my humility from the horns of the unicorns,’—was also information and prediction of the events which should befall Him. For I have already proved that He was the only-begotten of the Father of all things, being begotten in a peculiar manner Word and Power by Him, and having afterwards become man through the Virgin, as we have learned from the memoirs. Moreover, it is similarly foretold that He would die by crucifixion. For the passage, ‘Deliver my soul from the sword, and my only-begotten from the hand of the dog; save me from the lion’s mouth, and my humility from the horns of the unicorns,’ is indicative of the suffering by which He should die, i.e., by crucifixion. For the ‘horns of the unicorns,’ I have already explained to you, are the figure of the cross only. And the prayer that His soul should be saved from the sword, and lion’s mouth, and hand of the dog, was a prayer that no one should take possession of His soul: so that, when we arrive at the end of life, we may ask the same petition from God, who is able to turn away every shameless evil angel from taking our souls" (Dialogue with Trypho, ch. 105, ANF 1, p. 251f).

And I think St. Basil the Great, qualifies as a Father of the Patristic era:

St. Basil the Great says this, in his homily on Psalm 7:
"Accordingly, being under the sentence of death, knowing that there is One Who saves and One Who delivers, 'In Thee have I put my trust,' he says, 'save me' from 'weakness' and 'deliver me' from captivity. I think that the noble athletes of God, who have wrestled considerably with the invisible enemies during the whole of their lives, after they have escaped all their persecutions and reached the end of life, are examined by the prince of the world, in order that, if they are found to have wounds from the wrestling or any stains or effects of sin, they may be detained; but, if they are found unwounded and stainless, they may be brought by Christ into their rest as being unconquered and free. Therefore he prays for his life here and for his future life. For he says: 'Save me' here 'from them that persecute me; deliver me' there in the time of the scrutiny 'lest at any time he seize upon my soul like a lion.' You may learn this from the Lord Himself who said concerning the time of His passion: 'Now the prince of this world is coming, and in me he will have nothing' [John 14:30]. He who had committed no sin said that he had nothing; but for a man it will be sufficient, if he dares to say: 'The prince of this world is coming, and in me he will have few and trivial penalties.' And there is a danger of experiencing these penalties, unless we have some one to deliver us or save us. For, the two tribulations set forth, two petitions are introduced. 'Save me from the multitude of them that persecute me, and deliver me, lest at any time I be seized as if there were no one to redeem me" [Psalm 7:2-3] (The Fathers of the Church, vol. 46: St. Basil, Exegetical Homilies, trans. Sister Agnes Clare Way, C.D.P (Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press, 1963), p. 167f).

St. Athanasius the Great also qualifies as a Father of the Patristic era, and his life of St. Anthony the Great, he wrote:

"For once, when about to eat, having risen up to pray about the ninth hour, he perceived that he was caught up in the spirit, and, wonderful to tell, he stood and saw himself, as it were, from outside himself, and that he was led in the air by certain ones. Next certain bitter and terrible beings stood in the air and wished to hinder him from passing through. But when his conductors opposed them, they demanded whether he was not accountable to them. And when they wished to sum up the account from his birth, Antony's conductors stopped them, saying, 'The Lord hath wiped out the sins from his birth, but from the time he became a monk, and devoted himself to God, it is permitted you to make a reckoning.' Then when they accused him and could not convict him, his way was free and unhindered. And immediately he saw himself, as it were, coming and standing by himself, and again he was Antony as before. Then forgetful of eating, he remained the rest of the day and through the whole of the night groaning and praying. For he was astonished when he saw against what mighty opponents our wrestling is, and by what labours we have to pass through the air. And he remembered that this is what the Apostle said, 'according to the prince of the power of the air [10].' For in it the enemy hath power to fight and to attempt to hinder those who pass through. Wherefore most earnestly he exhorted, 'Take up the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day [11],' that the enemy, 'having no evil thing to say against us, may be ashamed [12].' And we who have learned this, let us be mindful of the Apostle when he says, 'whether in the body I know not, or whether out of the body I know not; God knoweth [13].' But Paul was caught up unto the third heaven, and having heard things unspeakable he came down; while Antony saw that he had come to the air, and contended until he was free. . And he had also this favour granted him. For as he was sitting alone on the mountain, if ever he was in perplexity in his meditations, this was revealed to him by Providence in prayer. And the happy man, as it is written, was taught of God [14]. After this, when he once had a discussion with certain men who had come to him concerning the state of the soul and of what nature its place will be after this life, the following night one from above called him, saying, 'Antony, rise, go out and look.' Having gone out therefore (for he knew whom he ought to obey) looking up, he beheld one standing and reaching to the clouds, tall, hideous, and fearful, and others ascending as though they were winged. And the figure stretched forth his hands, and some of those who were ascending were stayed by him, while others flew above, and having escaped heavenward, were borne aloft free from care. At such, therefore, the giant gnashed his teeth, but rejoiced over those who fell back. And forthwith a voice came to Antony, 'Understandest thou what thou seest?' And his understanding was opened, and he understood that it was the passing of souls, and that the tall being who stood was the enemy who envies the faithful. And those whom he caught and stopped from passing through are accountable to him, while those whom he was unable to hold as they passed upwards had not been subservient to him. So having seen this, and as it were being reminded, he struggled the more daily to advance towards those things which were before. And these visions he was unwilling to tell, but as he spent much time in prayer, and was amazed, when those who were with him pressed him with questions and forced him, he was compelled to speak, as a father who cannot withhold ought from his children. And he thought that as his conscience was clear, the account would be beneficial for them, that they might learn that discipline bore good fruit, and that visions were oftentimes the solace of their labours" (Chapters 65-66).

St. Gregory the Theologian would qualify as a Father of the Patristic era, and he writes, about the soul at its departure:

"Divine fear has overcome me,
a mass of horrors:
dismal Tartarus, scorching flames, whips,
demons, the tax-collectors of our souls.
All a myth to the wicked." (quoted in "The Departure of the Soul", from "Ethical Poems" PG 37:763A.

And there are 1110 pages more full of such citations.

 

I'm afraid I don't see the relevance. This is the sum total of what St. Paul had to say about it in 2 Corinthians 12:1-4 (NRSV):

"It is necessary to boast; nothing is to be gained by it, but I will go on to visions and revelations of the Lord. 2 I know a person in Christ who fourteen years ago was caught up to the third heaven—whether in the body or out of the body I do not know; God knows. 3 And I know that such a person—whether in the body or out of the body I do not know; God knows— 4 was caught up into Paradise and heard things that are not to be told, that no mortal is permitted to repeat."

St. Paul said not a word in his description of this experience in support of the toll house mythology.

 

He didn't die, and yet he saw things that generally only the dead would see. Obviously this disproves your assertion that only the dead could know anything about what happens when we die.

St. Anthony the Great obviously was able to see what happens when people die, and this is recounted by no less than St. Athanasius the Great... and similar accounts abound in the writings of the Fathers and Saints of the Church.

 

I don't see how that follows at all. For starters, the dead as such, not having eyes, can't be presumed to see anything (at least not prior to being resurrected). Secondly, St. Paul doesn't say he saw anything, but rather that he "heard things that are not to be told". Thirdly, why assume that what St. Paul experienced is what people experience at death? The text nowhere says that, and it doesn't logically follow that because St. Paul experienced something otherworldly and the dead also experience something otherworldly, that the dead experience what St. Paul experienced. That's the same fallacy as arguing that because a chihuahua is a dog, and a poodle is a dog, that a poodle is a chihuahua. Your interpretation of this passage is illogical and is an example of eisegesis.

 

Are you a Jehovah's Witness? Of course the dead can see. The Rich Man was able to see Lazarus and Abraham.
St. John the Apostle also had visions of heaven and the coming judgment, and he was not dead... and he specifically saw these visions.

And do you think St. Anthony the Great was liar and St. Athanasius the Great was just too stupid to know what you seem to think is so self evident?

 

I guess you're changing the subject from St. Paul's mystical experience now. As my badge indicates, I am Episcopalian. The story of the Rich Man and Lazarus was likely a parable. There is very little we can conclude from the Book of Revelation, including who its author was.

As you are aware, none of the saints were either morally flawless or possessed infallibility. There were a lot of things about the world that the Fathers did not know. Their writings have historical importance and where they defended the faith, their propositions are a helpful guide. At the same time, some modern scholars, like R.P.C. Hanson, have made the case that they weren't always particularly good exegetes. I revere them as forerunners in the faith but I'm not beholden to their every opinion.

 

I have no problem with the concept that, at the time of one's physical death, angels and demons might gather and briefly contend for that person's soul (or spirit, some would say). However, that contest cannot be won or lost on the grounds of the deceased's meritorious life, people's prayers for him, or any such thing. The sole deciding factor is whether the deceased person was justified from the guilt of sin and had received the righteousness of God as a gracious gift, through faith. Such a contest between angels and demons will be short, for either the person has been washed clean of all of sins' stains and guilt "as far as the east is from the west" by the precious blood of his Savior, Jesus Christ, or he has not been cleansed. One's destination is thus secured by what God has done for him while he yet lived. Thus, there can be no grounds for contention at some series of toll-houses, whereat one's past deeds are combed through for merit to overcome the enemy's accusations. Does our Redeemer not live? Does He not always intercede for us with our Father? Does not the Holy Spirit, God Himself, indwell us as a sign and a surety, a 'down payment' if you will, signifying our right-standing with Him and our eternal life to come if we will but persevere in faith to the end?

Our destiny at the time of death is black or white. There are no fifty shades of gray. Those made righteous by God are escorted by the angels into the light of our Lord in that pleasant place commonly termed 'heaven,' while those who never were made righteous are escorted by the demons into darkness.

Act_13:39 And by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses.

Rom 3:19 Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.
Rom 3:20 Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.
Rom 3:21 But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;
Rom 3:22 Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:
Rom 3:23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;
Rom 3:24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:
Rom 3:25 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;
Rom 3:26 To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.
Rom 3:27 Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith.
Rom 3:28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.

Rom_5:9 Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.

Rom 8:9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.
Rom 8:10 And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.

Joh 6:39 And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.

1Pe 2:24 Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed.
1Pe 2:25 For ye were as sheep going astray; but are now returned unto the Shepherd and Bishop of your souls.

The believer belongs to Christ. He has bought us at great price and has redeemed us out of the world. He will not suffer to lose a single one of us. By the precious blood of Jesus, no accusation of the adversary can prevail against us. But our own works and self-earned 'righteousness' are as dung. So how could these alleged toll-houses keep picking over our life's deeds, looking for self-righteous goodness or for the prayers of loved ones, to earn us passage into that which the Holy Spirit guarantees? The toll-house idea denies the power of Almighty God. If we understand who we have been made in Christ Jesus, if we realize that we have been spiritually reborn in God's image and that God sees no iniquity in us but instead considers us a fitting and fully sanctified and consecrated temple for Him to abide in (as in the Holiest of Holies in the Jewish temple wherein a sin-contaminated high priest might be struck dead), then we should also realize that toll-house battles over our destination are impossible and unscriptural.

 

I think it is evident from St. Paul's account that he did not merely hear, but also saw things. He simply says he heard things he was not allowed to repeat.

I don't think you will find a single Father of the Church he asserts that the parable of the rich man and lazarus was simply a parable, and nothing to tell us about the fate of the dead. Feel free to prove me wrong if you can, but it is clear that here you simply wish to dance around the plain meaning of Scripture.

The writers of Scripture were also not morally flawless or possessed of infallibility, however the Scriptures are infallible, but so is the Church, and given that we are talking about a phenomenon that is found throughout the Fathers and the Saints, the fact that any one of them was not morally flawless or personally infallible is neither here nor there.

 

I think you misunderstand what the Toll Houses point to. The idea is not that one is saved by one's own merit apart from the grace of God. The point is that you should not die having left the demons with grounds to cart you off to hades. Anyone who is saved will only be saved by the grace of God, but one does have to cooperate with that grace, and that idea is very scriptural.

 

St. John Chrysostom interpreted it as a parable. Otherwise I'm not sure what "plain meaning" you think I'm attempting to "dance around"; I'm just interpreting what's there. There are very few things about the intermediate state that the Scriptures unambiguously say. They say that Christ "preached to the spirits in prison", which assumes they were conscious and could somehow communicate with one another. How they did so is anyone's guess. Discussing the subject at all warrants a significant amount of restraint and humility. I certainly don't assume that the Church can give us a clearer picture of those things than what the Scriptures provided.