Aerial toll houses refers to a controversial teaching held by some Eastern Orthodox Christians, about the immediate state of the soul after death. According to this doctrine, "following a person's death the soul leaves the body, and is escorted to God by angels. During this journey the soul passes through an aerial realm, which is ruled by demons. The soul encounters these demons at various points referred to as 'toll-houses' where the demons then attempt to accuse it of sin and, if possible, drag the soul into hell."[1]
This teaching is extensively alluded to in hagiographical and other spiritual texts of the church, though it has never been formally promulgated by any ecumenical council and so remains in the realm of "theologoumena", or private theological opinion (as opposed to doctrines formally proclaimed by a church council).[2] Many Orthodox saints and theologians have openly endorsed it, while other bishops and theologians have condemned it as heretical and even gnostic in origin.[3]
Contents |
The most detailed account of the aerial toll-houses is found in the hagiography of Saint Basil the New, found in the Lives of Saints for 26 March (according to the Orthodox calendar). In this rendering, Saint Theodora, spiritual student of Saint Basil, appeared to another student, the pious and holy laymen Gregory. According to the story, Gregory had prayed to God and asked him to inform them of what happened to Theodora after her death. God answered his prayers (according to this account) by sending Theodora herself to Gregory; and told him, in great detail, about her journey through the toll-houses.[4]
According to Theodora's alleged teaching, every person has demons that tempt them. These demons keep a record of every sin of thought or action they succeed in tempting a person to commit, though repented sins are erased from the demonic records. On the third day after the soul separates from the body, according to this account, it is carried by angels towards Heaven. On the way, souls must go past twenty aerial toll-houses. Each toll house is populated by demons devoted to particular sins. At each toll-house, demons demand that souls "pay" for their sins by giving an account of compensatory good deeds. If the soul is unable to compensate for a sin, the demons take it to hell.[5]
Some bishops and theologians of the Orthodox Christian Church consider this teaching controversial—even false. They argue that it is a form of gnosticism, or neo-gnosticism, and claim that the teaching is opposed to the church's catechism and other Orthodox teachings.[3] Critics of the teaching, such as Rev. Dr. Michael Azkoul, argue that the teaching has only one main contemporary proponent: Fr. Seraphim Rose, an American Orthodox hieromonk and theologian who wrote a pro-toll house book on this subject entitled The Soul After Death. While Fr. Seraphim endeavored to demonstrate that this teaching is derived from Patristic and other church sources, his opponents—among them Rev. Azkoul and Archbishop Lev Puhalo—found his conclusions questionable.[7] Moreover, opponents of this teaching argue that it emphasizes fear and guilt as a way of keeping believers "in line", while ignoring the forgiveness of Jesus Christ—who, accoording to Orthodox Christian teaching, came to earth to save the world and humanity when they least deserved it.
The traditional proponents of the toll-house teaching argue that it appears in the hymnology of the Church,[8][9] and in stories of the lives of some saints (for example, the Life of Saint Anthony the Great, written by Saint Athanasius the Great, the life of Saint Basil the New, and Saint Theodora, in the homilies of St. Cyril of Alexandria,[10] in the Discourses of Abba Isaiah,[11] the Philokalia, the Ladder of Divine Ascent, and the Dogmatics of the Orthodox Church by Justin of Celie). Several contemporary Church figures speak about toll-houses.[12][13][14][15] Recent saints, including Saint Ignatius Brianchaninov[16] and Saint Theophan the Recluse,[17] insisted not only on the truthfulness of but also on the necessity of this teaching in the spiritual life of a Christian.
Proponents of this teaching also point out that none of the Church Fathers ever expressed any doubt about these teachings, which have been present in the Church since at least the fourth century. Nonetheless, there is an ongoing debate between contemporary Orthodox theologians on whether or not these sources are indicating precisely the same teaching as the toll-house theory (as popularly presented). Some say that given the amount of fear that comes along with this teaching, the love of Christ becomes misunderstood and is forgotten, while others suggest that the fear is perfectly "natural" and salvational for Orthodox Christians. While some say that the toll houses are only metaphorical and the demons can only tempt and never judge honestly, others believe in a strong vivid representation of real "houses of taxation" where demons have the right to ask their victims to account for their wrongdoings, and actually let the victim go if a good enough payment is offered.
Critics reply that because the teaching of the aerial toll houses, in the form presented in this article, has never been accepted or even discussed in any Ecumenical Council, it is impossible to accept as dogma, or even to take seriously. Some Orthodox Theologians, such as the retired Archbishop Lazar Puhalo, go as far as to ridicule the attempt to transform what he refers to as a "Gnostic Myth" into an actual dogma of faith. [18]
Some proponents insist that the teaching of the toll houses has been accredited by the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad[19], but others insist that this is not the case. On the contrary, as specified by the referenced document, the Holy Synod of the Russian Church Abroad actually enforces "the cessation in our magazines of controversy on dogmatic questions and, in particular, on questions concerning life after death" and that this controversy must be ended on "both sides" [19]. The article does, however, present some support for the Aerial Toll House teaching and even goes on to condemn some actions of (now) retired Archbishop Puhalo, with regard to this teaching.