Aerial Toll House - Controversy

Controversy

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. 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 Lazar Puhalo (a hierarch in the Orthodox Church of America) —found his conclusions questionable. 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, according 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, 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, in the Discourses of Abba Isaiah, the Philokalia, the Ladder of Divine Ascent, and the Dogmatics of the Orthodox Church by Justin Popović). Several contemporary Church figures speak about toll-houses. Recent saints, including Saint Ignatius Brianchaninov and Saint Theophan the Recluse, 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, 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 (of victim's good deeds) 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.

Some proponents insist that the teaching of the toll houses has been accredited by the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad. However, 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". 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.