Toll houses

[Gideon]

Can anyone explain this teaching to me pls, and perhaps why it may be considered neo-gnostic?

[Fr Averky]

Gideon,

There are many Fathers of the Church who actually accept this concept. Since it is the First Week of Great Lent, and we have almost 11 hours of services a day, I can't send you quotes right away, but I will. Fr.Seraphim Rose's book the "Soul After Death" was written as an explanation of this idea, and to counter Rev.Lev Puhalo's idea that the soul goes into some sort of suspended state or sleep after death and that when a saint appears to a person, it is not really the saint himself, but an angel sent in his place. Fr. Michael Azkoul wrote a volume in which he states that Fr. Seraphim Rose is a neo-gnostic, but that simply is not he case. Alas, you will find that there are those whose scholarly labours merit little attention, for they are merely polemical in nature and of no great use for the soul. I knew Fr. Seraphim Rose from the time he was a layman, and I have known Fr. Azkoul for nearly thirty years, and am well aware of his views, so I do have an idea of what I am speaking. Fr. Michael Pomozansky's book "Dogmatic Theology," also has good information found in a chapter which speaks specifically about the toll houses. The Russian Church seems to accept this concept more readily than others.

[Gideon]

I have seen Ikons of Fr. Seraphim Rose is this acceptable? Would you Rev. Hieromonk, consider him a Saint?

Gideon

[Hermit]

I've come across some writings about Fr. Seraphim Rose on the internet, which intrigued me since he lived as a hermit for a while very near to where I live, in an area I've considered doing the hermit thing (wilderness near Platina, CA ... many think of California as mostly pavement and cities, but the northern part is mostly unspoiled wilderness). His particular ideas don't interest me nearly as much as his life.

Some seem to consider him a saint, apparently he appeared in resplendant, shining garb to a woman as he lay dying, and there are some stories of healings and miracles after he died. Others look down on him as a neo-gnostic heretic. I don't really care much about theology, I'm sure he believed false things and the church believes false things and I believe false things (but of course this is the doctrine and theology section, forgive my off-track thoughts.)

As Rev. Hieromonk A. mentioned, Fr Azkoul has written extensively against the "toll house" idea, and many of those arguments can be found online with a search.

Here's an interesting secular article written about him from Pomona College where he once studied, very good and balanced overview: http://www.pomona.edu/Magazine/PCMSP01/saint.shtml

[Fr Averky]

Dear Hermit,

Fr. Seraphim was not a hermit, per se. He had a small one room cabin some distance and up the hill from the monastery, and would now and again retreat there for a few days. Most of the time. however, he was active serving, working in the print shop, dealing with pilgrims and so on. What he did have, was an inward sense of spiritually being "alone." Fr. Herman was always running around frantically, being theatrical and melodramtic, while Fr. Seraphim was always wonderfully quiet and composed. A person always came from from having had a spiritual talk with him feeling peaceful and comforted. Fr. Herman had his gifts too, for he gave very inspiring talks, making one feel so blessed to be Orthodox, and to sincerely want to live an Orthodox Christian life. There was a great contrast between the two men, but it worked. Sadly, after Fr. Seraphim reposed. Fr. Herman went off the deep end. I have no use for Fr. Michael Azkoul's opinions about anything. The Russians and Greeks have always had divergent views on the approach to the Spiritual life. One small example: In Greek monasteries, such as those under Fr. Ephraim, a blessing is needed for just about anything, not only for monks, but for his lay spiritual children as well. I had one pious Greek lady ask me if I would give her my blessing to ask me a question!. In Russsian monasticism, one is under the guidance of his spiritual father, but is also considered to be a "rational sheep" of Christ, so it is hope that he can make it through the every day matters of life.

[Hermit]

Thank you for the information, Rev. Hieromonk A., I always appreciate details. I'd thought that Fr. Seraphim had spent some extensive time with only one companion as the article implied, but even then he must have been connected with the skete:

"At Platina, Rose lived for years in an uninsulated shack without running water or electricity, with a tiny wood-burning stove for warmth. He built the cabin himself of salvaged lumber on land his parents helped him and Podmoshensky buy. In winter, the silent pine forest that pressed in on their outpost was often deep in snow. In summer, the heat could be stifling.
The cabin, called a cell in the monastic tradition, was about 8 feet by 10 feet. A tiny room attached to the main structure contained a small shelf of books that served as Rose's library. Rose slept in a corner on a bed made of two boards."

Do you still live here in northern California, Rev. Hieromonk A.? I'm in one of the villages at the foot of Mt. Shasta.

[Fr Averky]

Dear Hrmit,

Thank you for the clarification. The author is speaking, I am rather sure, about the very early days of the monastery. I remember how joyful the co-strugglers were when they moved from a very busy San Francisco street to the utter stillness of the forest.

However, as in all of monastic history, people heard that they were there, and started to pour into the monastery. At one point, they had 14-15 monks. I don't really know how many they have at the present time.

I am familiar with Mt. Shasta. I lived in Oregon during my young life, and I remeber going into our back yard and painting water colors sketches and paintings of Mt. St. Helen. I now live in up state New york. I was received into Holy Baptism in San Franciso, and Frs. Herman and Seraphim sang at my baptism. They were still layman

[Jeff Taylor]

I recently read Athos: travels on the Holy Mountain by Matthew Spencer, recounting his stay of a few weeks at the Grand Lavra in 1993. A novice there told him about the "toll houses," so apparently this idea is being taught on Mt. Athos, or at least it was at the Grand Lavra 10 years ago.

[demetrios karaolanis]

I would like to know what church tradition has to say about the toll houses if anyone can find it, I do think it is a traditional view though if the athonite monks are teaching it.

[Mark Flory]

Demetrios,

This is a discussion that I have promised myself not to get sucked into. However, your comment that "I do think it is a traditional view...if the athonite monks are teaching it" needs to be addressed. We would do well to remember that the primary supporters of Origen and Evagrius were the monks, and yet their teachings were (at least in part) rejected by the Church (hence, while they are very influential on the spirituality of the Orthodox Church, they are not considered saints). The teaching is "traditional" if it is TRUE, not just because some group of people whom we (rightfully) respect uphold it. Which is not to say anything at all one way or the other about the validity of the toll house teaching.

[demetrios karaolanis]

oops! I once again showed myself to have limited knowledge of some topics, but it is ok I always learn from this forum but I sometimes speak rather rashly, thanks for the correction.

[Marvin Vann]

Back to the issue of the Tollhouses: There is an interesting passage somewhere in one of Fr. Thomas Hopkos's published addresses on this. He points out the major points on each side of the debate: On the one, hand, the Church has always clearly held that one must atone for ones sins in this life, an opportunity not afforded one in the hereafter; on the other hand, prominent Fathers of the Church have held a position like this, and allusions to something like the Tollhouse idea are to be found in some of the ancient prayers in our liturgies and prayer books. The issue is imbricated with the question of why we pray for the dead.

If I understand him correctly, Father Thomas Hopko proposes as a solution that, while atonement and sufferings surely are not "spread out" in time after death, a kind of judgment is undergone at the time of death, itself. However, God, for Whom every moment is present in the eternal nunc stans, is not confined to the successive flow of time in the way that we are. Therefore, we may still entertain hope that our prayers for the dead, even during what to our experience occurs after the moment of a person's death, are of avail. And, the moment of death and of judgment may appear to the departing soul as if prolonged, as is depicted in the Tollhouse idea.

It seems to be that Father Hopko may have spoken, too, of a first and second judgment, but my memory is fuzzy. Anyone have clearer ideas on this?

[Fr Averky]

I was going to do a little more substantial research into to this, but Have been quite ill, and just came home from the hospital. I ask all of you to pray for me. The reference to the first and second judgemenmt is corect.According to Tradition, when I person first dies, his soul is permitted to go to those places on earth where his lived, had joys, sorrows, happy occasions, and so on. On the 40th day he stands befoe God for the first Judgement, and that's where the Toll Houses comes in. Christ is present in His Angels, and the demons are also there. The Gaurdian angel of the person's soul is there particularly. Before his temporary fate is decided (and you shall see what I mean by temporary) the demons rush forth with all his sins and evil deeds, and the angels bring forth his faith and good works. The First Toll House is Idle Chatter, and every foolish remark, every bit of gossip and so and so are brought up. And, every kind word is brought up. I don't remember them all or their order, but there is the Toll House of Sins of the Flesh, etc. When all the good has been weighed against the evil, and one has committed more good, then his soul will have the blessedness of knowing that he will be with God, but not forever. If the person has commited many sins, crimes and evil deeds, than he will have the anguish of knowing that he will be separated from God, but not forever. Thus the Toll Houses are more figurative, in that the various deeds, both good and bad are divided into disticnt groups. This is called the Immediate Judgement. From this comes the Chuirch's teaching praying for the dead. We know that the Final Judgement of all of mankind from the creation of Adam and Eve until the end time will take place at the Second Coming of Christ Our Lord. Then, those who have gained Salvation will be united to their glorified bodies, and will be on the Right Side as Christ's sheep - forever rejoicing with God. But woe to those who have lost Him, for on the Day of Judgement, not only will they be cast away with Satan and his demons forever, but they too will be joined with their bodies, but their bodies will not be glorified - no, they will suffer the torments of Hell forever. While the Orthodox Church does not teach that there is Purgatory, the souls of those who have passed through the Immediate Judgement, and who are experiencing joy or suffering great anguish have not been judged Finally, therefore, the faithful offer up good works prayers, and serve memorial services for the souls of the departed, asking God to show them mercy and grant them salvation. When we read stories of pious people in all Orthodox Nations, we see that people built entire churches or whole monasteries in memory of their parents or relatives. Any of you who belong to a long established parish might see chalices, Gospels, icons, and other church appointments with an engraved tag or painted in the corner, Given by the Papadopolis Family in memory of thir Father Demitrios, June 11, 1890. In the Book of Tobis or Tobit, it says that The giving of alms covers many sins, so in giving these "alms relatives and friends of the reposed beg God to cover.or forgive their sins before the Dread Judgement and grant them Salvation. Purgatory, on the other hand is that place where something similar, but not quite the same, and not quite the same thing takes place: Purgatory is the place where the souls of the departed go who are neither good enough to go to Heaven, not bad enough go to Hell. Their souls burn in fire like Hell, but after a time known to God, they will eventually be freed and go to Heaven. When Christ died on the Cross for the sins of mankind, He received so much Grace that there was more than enough to go around for all of Mankind then and for all eternity. Since the Mother of God was standing at the Cross, She too received an over-abundance of Grace. As the Centuries wore on, and there were numerous Martyrs, Confessors, Doctors,*Fathers, and so on, they too had produced much more grace than they needed. All of this "Amazing Grace" was kept in sort of Heavenly Bank Account and who alone had the "Keys" to all of the Grace÷ Of Course, The Holy Father-The Pope of Rome. For saying Novenas, for going on a pilgrimage, for saying so many Rosaries, one could receive an Indulgence, that is time off from the dicomfort and inconvenience Purgatory. If any of you has seen a pre-Vatican Holy Card, or Prayer Book, or other pios material, you often see the words "365 Days Indulgence. When you see a "jubilee Year in Rome, when the Pope of Roman opens the Holy Door, everyone who walks through that door receives a Papal Indulgence forgiving all of his sins for all of his life (!) Since the Blessed Virgin Mary was born without Original Sin, and therefore could not sin, she has and abundance of Grace, and since she was standing at the Cross and received so much of God's Grace, by some she is considered to be The Mediatrix of All Graces, and Co-Redemptrix With Jesus Christ. Forgive me for going on. Now, while ther are those who the think that idea of the Toll Houses is heretical, like the pseudo-theologian M. Azkoul,[some people proudly show their PhD, but what if it is in an un-related subject? If I had a PhD in electrical engineering, would that make me a theologian?] there are many Fathers of the Early Church who attest to its teaching. I don't think that the Church has ever put them into the light of Doctrine, or Dogma, but uses them as a sobering "visual" lesson of what many sins and vices we have, and the virtues we can receive from God which will save us. Now, I might not be a great "theologian" like The Rev Puhalo, who believes that souls go into a "Death Sleep," and who told some that there really isn't a place called Hell, I am much more comfortable with the view of the Toll Houses than that of Purgatory. Imagine Tetzel, the Dominican sent out to gather the monies for the building the New St. Peter's in the 15th Century saying "Even if a person were to lie with the Dear Holy Virgin Herself, the Holy Father has the authority to set him free." Luther was so narrow-minded to be offendced by such words!

Allow me to call to your attention Archimandrite Panteleimon's "Eternal Mysteries Beyond the Grave,' Jordanville. I must caution anyone who reads it that Fr. Paantleimon, who founded Holy Monastery in 1930, was a simple Ukrainian peasant, who nevertheless was a great struggler and a phenomenal man of prayer. Being a sincere missionary, he used the real "cut and paste" method to print his books - he would cut out articles from various 19th century books in Russian, print them and give them to those newly arrived from Russia. The caution part come in where he makes use of typical pious tales of the time, and some of them sound to an American's ears like something more out of "para-normal experiences", but even in these there is something to be learned

Fr.A.

[Hermit]

For the sake of accuracy, here is the official teaching of the Catholic Church on Purgatory, found in the Catechism of the Catholic Church at http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc.htm Please note that ALL in Purgatory are saved, but must undergo purification before entering the presence of God. There's a difference between the temporal and eternal aspects of sin.

III. THE FINAL PURIFICATION, OR PURGATORY

1030 All who die in God's grace and friendship, but still imperfectly purified, are indeed assured of their eternal salvation; but after death they undergo purification, so as to achieve the holiness necessary to enter the joy of heaven.

1031 The Church gives the name Purgatory to this final purification of the elect, which is entirely different from the punishment of the damned.606 The Church formulated her doctrine of faith on Purgatory especially at the Councils of Florence and Trent. The tradition of the Church, by reference to certain texts of Scripture, speaks of a cleansing fire:607


As for certain lesser faults, we must believe that, before the Final Judgment, there is a purifying fire. He who is truth says that whoever utters blasphemy against the Holy Spirit will be pardoned neither in this age nor in the age to come. From this sentence we understand that certain offenses can be forgiven in this age, but certain others in the age to come.608

1032 This teaching is also based on the practice of prayer for the dead, already mentioned in Sacred Scripture: "Therefore [Judas Maccabeus] made atonement for the dead, that they might be delivered from their sin."609 From the beginning the Church has honored the memory of the dead and offered prayers in suffrage for them, above all the Eucharistic sacrifice, so that, thus purified, they may attain the beatific vision of God.610 The Church also commends almsgiving, indulgences, and works of penance undertaken on behalf of the dead:


Let us help and commemorate them. If Job's sons were purified by their father's sacrifice, why would we doubt that our offerings for the dead bring them some consolation? Let us not hesitate to help those who have died and to offer our prayers for them.611

[Fr Averky]

Dear Hermit,

Thank you for the information.

Fr.A.

[M.C. Steenberg]

Dear Gideon, Demetrius and others,

The short take on the notion of 'tollhouses' is that whether or not it is heretical or accurate depends largely (sometimes entirely) on how the term is being used -- i.e., to what the title 'tollhouses' is being applied. Some Orthodox writers, especially modern, have construed the 'tollhouses' to be almost physical (though by definition spiritual) 'places' or endroits of tribulation and provocation by the forces of evil, 'passed through' (again, in a pseudo-physical manner) by souls in a series of intermediate judgements. This is simply not the teaching of the Church.

Others have used the term 'tollhouses' to refer to the particular judgements of departed souls that follow death yet precede the general judgement at the Second Coming of Christ. This is the teaching of the Church, of which the imagery of 'tollhouses' offers a vivid presentation, a spur to activity, and a manner of understanding spiritual realities through a conception manageable by our present intellects.

For those interested in such things, I will recommend again (as I have elsewhere in this community) the short text by Constantine Cavarnos entitled Death and the Future Life According to Orthodox Teaching. One finds herein a well-balanced discussion of the issues at hand, in the larger context of the Church's teaching on the future life.

INXC, Matthew

[M.C. Steenberg]

As an additional comment: In Fr A.'s post earlier in this thread, whilst summarising a certain strand of Roman Catholic thought on the afterlife, he noted:


When Christ died on the Cross for the sins of mankind, He received so much Grace that there was more than enough to go around for all of Mankind then and for all eternity.

I know that the following was intended by Fr A. in his posting, but for those who 'skim' posts it is important to redouble for clarity: the notion of superabundant grace as the source of atonement, is absolutely antithetical to Orthodox thought.

INXC, Matthew

[alexei petrovitch]

Christos Voskrese!

Dear brothers in Christ,

I am an Orthodox Christian of the Russian Orthodox Diocese of Alaska (OCA) and this is my first time here. I look forward to joining in.

In Christ,

Alexei

[Br Paul Zimmerman]

Christ is Risen!
Alexei,

Welcome,I am from Australia. I hope you enjoy and can contribute to the discussions.

Br Paul

[Priest David Moser]

Now, while ther are those who the think that idea of the Toll Houses is heretical, ... there are many Fathers of the Early Church who attest to its teaching. I don't think that the Church has ever put them into the light of Doctrine, or Dogma, but uses them as a sobering "visual" lesson of what many sins and vices we have, and the virtues we can receive from God which will save us.

I would like to elaborate a little on Fr Averky's comments (which are already quite complete). The tollhouses are best thought of in terms of a parable or an icon. They are an image which we can understand of a reality that is beyond our comprehension. After our death there is a "particular judgement" - Orthodox doctrine is very clear on that, there is no arguement. OTOH, we cannot even begin to comprehend what that judgement is like or what shape/form it takes and so we are given an icon - a verbal icon - that we can at least grasp. The vision of the "tollhouses" is a verbal icon of the spiritual reality of the particular judgement.

If the "tollhouses" were presented as literally true, then I would have to agree that they are artifacts of the gnostic heresy - but nowhere have I ever seen in all my Orthodox research any indication that states that we have to accept the image of the tollhouses as a literal description of the particular judgement.

Fr Seraphim's book has been mentioned as well as Fr Panteleimon's book. There are now a few others out there which are, in my opinon, better and more organized. Read Bishop Hierotheos' book "Life After Death" and that will give probably the best explanation extant in English that is reliably Orthodox (Fr Seraphim's book - The Soul After Death" is good, however it is not as good as Bp Hierotheos' book) There is btw a new book, a translation of a Russian 19th Century volume by Monk Mitrophan, that has recently been translated and is now in the typesetting process - should be out soon (we hope) which is also a very complete and very good Orthodox work on the life beyond the grave.

Priest David Moser

[Razhden Irakli Guriadz]

I am sixty years old and Orthodox from birth. In all of my life and reading I have only encountered the idea of "Tollhouses" in one book entitled "Eternal Mysteries Beyond the Grave".

I don't remember who published it.
God bless us all to find the truth.

[Kempis]

Are toll houses a common teaching? Is it 'Orthodoxy?'

[Herman Blaydoe]

Not common. Many, many Orthodox have been baptized and buried and presumably gone on to their reward never hearing about "toll houses."

It does not represent the totality of "Orthodoxy" but it is Orthodox, if we are to judge by the prayers of the Holy Church, which do make mention of appeals to the Theotokos for a good defense before the demons of the air upon our death. The teaching has gained attention due to the writings of Fr. Seraphim Rose who emphasized the teaching and Bishop Lazar Puhalo who argued against it. Several other respected Orthodox writers, such as Metropolitan Hierotheos Vlachos take something of a middle ground between those two.

I think it can be said that the concept of "toll houses" is part of Orthodoxy, I don't know that it is essential to Orthodoxy, and whether or not anyone personally accepts or rejects the concept is NOT considered a litmus test for "Orthodoxy."

At least that is my simple understanding.

I am not a licensed or certified theologian. These views may or may not reflect the actual teachings of the Holy Orthodox Church, consult an approved spiritual counselor before accepting. Not legal in all spiritual states.

[Fr Raphael Vereshack]

Dear Herman,

Your last post on the toll-house got me thinking. What is it about this concept that leaves us with so little clarity? I came up with some possibilites: 1)self-will; we want to hear as little as possible about judgment of our sins; that we really bear responsibilty for our sins; we can even get angry that God would be so 'cruel'. And the teaching about the toll-houses is so 'in your face' when it comes to judgement; there seems nothing nice about it.

2) there is something about the toll-houses that seems almost like it comes from a Gothic novel; with our rationalism we have 'stream-lined' the after-life, heaven & hell; we often have the same reaction to the toll houses that we do to the ancient accounts of experiences of those who temporarily were in the after-life reality.

3) we react against the idea that there is a judgement before Christ's Judgement; that the demons could could condemn us (why trust demons? ) for something that would be eternally binding. Whatever the toll-houses are & represent how could it be this? Yes- I also have these thoughts and and questions. It does seem Orthodox that there is a testing after death or toll-houses perhaps. I do however question anything that appears to get in the way of God's mercy (His direct mercy & the prayers of others for us when we die)and guestion its Orthodoxy. Again I am not questioning the toll-houses so much as how they are interpreted by us.

Anyways- these are just my thoughts- I rely and value the input of others.

In Christ- Fr R

[Rebecca]

Herman,

agree on non-litmus test point you make.

and because it is timely:

http://www.monachos.net/patristics/ephraim/index.shtml

[James Isaac Crabtree]

Greetings all..

I just bought "The Soul, the Body, and Death" by Fr. Seraphim Rose. It is a theological masterpiece! It's full of scriptural and patristic quotations.

The tollhouses seemed silly to me at first, until I realized what it meant. Here, in my opinion, are the implications of the tollhouses.

1) Sin is not merely some forensic infraction of a moral code. Sin is treason to the Kingdom of God. Sin gives the dark prince some sort of hold in our lives. At the tollhouses, the evil one will examine us to see if we have any debt to him.. anything of his in us.

2) Grace is also not something merely "imputed" or credited to our account. It must be appropriated by repentance, prayers, almsgivings. In the vision of Gregory concerning Theodora's ascent through the tollhouses, she is given a "bag of gold," spiritually representing prayers that St. Basil the New had said for her. I find this very similar to the spiritual vision in which John saw the prayers of the Saints as incense. Those prayers would allow Theodora to pass unhindered through the aerial realms. They were a direct manifestation of Christ's Grace. The grace of Christ is an ENABLING grace.. it enables us to "work out your salvation with fear and trembling."

3) The tollhouses also imply to me that while people may fall alone, no one is saved alone. We are saved in our participation in the saved community, the Church. Prayers, offerings, comemorations, and almsgivings for the dead directly appropriate the Grace of Christ on their behalf.

4) The tollhouses also imply that prior to the Second Coming, there is a chance for those now in Hades. Insomuch as they are willing to receive our help, those in hades may be lifted to paradise. Christ God, through His Cross, is indeed still drawing all men unto Himself! St. Gregory the Great is said to have noticed that the pagan Roman Emperor Trajan did a very good work on behalf of a poor widow... an act that was very much Christian in character. St. Gregory was moved by the All-Holy Spirit to weep and pray for this pagan. It is said that he baptized Trajan in his tears! Thanks to Saint Gregory, the Grace of Christ Jesus allowed Trajan to rise up from Hades and pass through the tollhouses to paradise! There are MANY other examples of these kinds of things in the lives of the saints.

5) The tollhouses take literally verses in scripture that refer to the "prince of the powers of the air," and "wickedness in high places."

Only the unrepentant will be hindered by these aerial spirits. Those who have manifested the grace of Christ will boldly confront the demons. It is said that the souls of small children pass them by and put the mighty princes to shame.

I love the doctrine of the tollhouses because of its catholicity within the Holy Church. Undisputably it is a part of Orthodox Tradition, and can be objectively traced from the third century onwards. From John Chrysostom to John of Damascus to TONS of others. Below are just a FEW of the people who have mentioned the tollhouses in their writings:

St. Eustratius the Great Martyr (4th century)
St. Niphon of Constantia in Cyprus (4th century)
St. Symeon the Fool for Christ (6th century)
St. John the Merciful (7th century)
St Symeon of the Wondrous Mountain (7th century)
St. Macarius the Great (4th century)
St. Columba (6th century)
St. Adamnan (8th century)
St. Boniface (8th century)
St. Basil the New (10th century)
the Soldier Taxiotes
St. John of the Ladder (6th century)

Those are my two cents on the aerial tollhouses.

[Kempis]

quote: It is said that he baptized Trajan in his tears! Thanks to Saint Gregory, the Grace of Christ Jesus allowed Trajan to rise up from Hades and pass through the tollhouses to paradise!

Only Christ saves, not the hopes of the greatest saint can saved a sinner.

[christodoulos]

Christ saves. Christ baptizes. Christ gives himself in the Eucharist. This does not negate divine synergy or human agency in each of those things.

[Kempis]

christodoulos, i never said it does.

k

[Andrey Vershinin]

I've have in my possession two books by Father Seraphim Rose.

1. ORTHODOXY and the Religion of the Future
2. The Soul After Death

I suggest for people to read them, I found them very helpful in allowing me to find out the standing of the Orthodox Church on many topics.

The first book contained information of UFOs, and how the Orthodox view them. The Soul After Death points out an Orthodox understanding of the Astral Plane, and near-death visions and experiences. Another Orthodox understanding which is offered in the same book, is also about the "spirit guides" and where they dwell(astral realm.)

Father Seraphim Rose goes to point out many dates,(in ORTHODOXY and the Religion of the Future),in which the Greek Orthodox Church, attempted to commune the other religions. One such date (in ORTHODOXY and Religion of the Future ) was February 1972, in which the Greek Orthodox Church "held an official theological "dialogue" with the Jews". Other dates which were pointed out were 1960(Temple of Understanding), and 1970,1971(WCC-related work)

all these dates were in the Introduction, so the understanding is paved, and the rest of the road is a tale

[Charalambos Andrew Geo]

I have to add, when reading those books check it with their spiritual fr because me and some friends read it, we were very interested but slightly not ready yet as we had a slightly negative reaction, if you want details i can ellaborate but that is not important, very good books that i liked when i read parts but i do advice to check it with their spiritual fr and to read with prayer in mind, it might be for those with wisdom teath or for those who can chew for others and explain

[Kosmas Damianides]

"Do you not know that the Saints will judge the world? And if the world is to be judged by you, are you incompetent to try trivial cases? Do you not know that we are to judge angels? How much more, matters pertaining to this life?!" (1 Corinthians 6:2-4).

[Kosmas Damianides]

Dear Brothers and Sisters

Before we can look at the writings of various Fathers shouldn't we firstly look at the greatest authority we have regarding our Christian Faith the words of Christ in the Holy Bible?

Here are various Biblical verses which discuss judgement of souls after we die.


The Father judges no one, but has given all judgment to the Son, that all may honor the Son, even as they honor the Father. He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent him. Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears my word and believes him who sent me, has eternal life; he does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life. Truly, truly, I say to you, the hour is coming, and now is, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live. For as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son also to have life in himself, and has given him authority to execute judgment, because he is the Son of man. Do not marvel at this; for the hour is coming when all who are in the tombs will hear his voice and come forth, those who have done good, to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil, to the resurrection of judgment. (John 5:22-29)

And if I cast out demons by Be-elzebul, by whom do your sons cast them out? Therefore they (the demons) shall be your judges. But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you. (Matthew 12:27-28, Luke 11:19-20)
From these two verses above, we may see where the idea of being 'judged by demons' comes from. If someone is empty and void of the Grace of God and His Holy Spirit then naturally he would be under the powere of demons and demons would be able to judge him or her. But on closer examination, who is void and empty of God's Grace and Spirit? If we truly believe in God then we should not fear being judged by demons since they would have no power over us.


If any one hears my sayings and does not keep them, I do not judge him; for I did not come to judge the world but to save the world. He who rejects me and does not receive my sayings has a judge; the Word that I have spoken will be his judge on the last day." (John 12:47-48).

And He commanded us to preach to the people, and to testify that He is the one ordained by God to be judge of the living and the dead. To Him all the prophets bear witness that every one who believes in Him receives forgiveness of sins through His name. (Acts 10:42-43).

All who have sinned without the law will also perish without the law, and all who have sinned under the law will be judged by the law. For it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the doers of the law who will be justified. (Romans 2:12-13)
From these three verses therefore we see that God has two methods of judgement depending on who we ourselves consider to be our judge. if we have Christ as our judge and follow His teachings then He will judge us according to His mercy, however if we have the Law as our witness and judge then we will be judged by the Law.

The 20 laws or commandments (toll houses) mentioned before are those reserved for those who heard the Word of God but did not keep it. Those who did not accept the mercy of God who thought that the Law could save them. "Therefore they (the demons) shall be your judges." Says Christ.

The 20 (demonic) Toll Houses


1) Idle talking & foul language
2) Lying
3) Judging & slandering
4) Gluttony & Drunkenness
5) Laziness
6) Stealing
7) Greed for money & stinginess
8) Extortion & bribery
9) Falsehood & Vanity
10) Envy
11) Pride
12) Anger
13) Enmity (remembering of wrongs)
14) Robbery
15) Magic & Foretune telling
16) Fornication
17) Adultery
18) Sodomy
19) Idol worship
20) Unmercifulness & hardheartedness

In conclusion God wishes us to live a Spiritual Life filled with God's Love, Grace, Love and Mercy. Let Christ therefore come into our hearts and be our judge. I hope that Christ truly will be our judge.

Glory To You Christ our God.

Kosmas

[Kosmas Damianides]

I forgot to mention,

Ultimately these "toll houses" based on visions and dreams by the Saints are pedagogical, didactic tools and not real. The Orthodox Church does not base doctrine or dogma on visions.

The Orthodox Church classes these things in the category of theologoumena, meaning that it is unclear and is definitely not an article of faith necessary for salvation. Although these visions are definitely mentioned by the Saints this does not necessarily make it 'Orthodoxy'.

Hell is not, as we have previously said a place as such. The Devil does not have horns, a long tail and carry a trident, nor is hell a 'place' filled with hot lava, boiling tar, sulfur and bodies of people being cut into pieces again and again. These horrific descriptions are figurative and symbolic, not real.

In Christ

Kosmas

[Fr Raphael Vereshack]

Hell is not, as we have previously said a place as such. The Devil does not have horns, a long tail and carry a trident, nor is hell a 'place' filled with hot lava, boiling tar, sulfur and bodies of people being cut into pieces again and again. These horrific descriptions are figurative and symbolic, not real.

I am afraid that I must take issue with this since what is symbolic is not opposed to the real in Orthodoxy. In fact for us the symbolic is reality in the sense of "seeing through the glass darkly" & of experiencing something that is most definitely a reality of God's providence even if we do not have the exact words to describe this. So to say that hell is not a place is not to deny its existence or its tragic consequences. And I think something similar could be said about the toll houses which are after all attested to by many saints who are saints by virtue of the fact that they have Orthodox (ie literally "proper" or "correct") vision of God's reality.

What needs to be questioned I think is not the reality of these things so much as what God's judgement means for us.

In Christ- Fr Raphael

[Owen Jones]

Theology, generically speaking, is the science of spiritual experiences and their symbolization. In that sense, it's not that different from classical philosophy. In Christian theology, the revelation is more complete, we might say, and therefore more true, than in the Israelite or philosophic revelation. But we must not detach the symbol from reality.

That's the result of an over-objectification of the symbol, which happens in Phariseeism, or, later, in secular ideologies, such as scientism. The ultimate symbol is man himself. We cannot define a man in an immanent sense. We can measure a person, describe a person, describe the bio-chemical processes, his history in an immediate sense, cultural influences, beliefs, etc., but that does not tell us either what that particular man is, or what mankind is. At some point we are left with the mystery, the truth of which can only be symbolized. Man is a symbolic representation of the divine mystery. There is no other purpose for man to exist. No other reason why he should exist. The loss of the reality of the symbol is the source of man's downfall, his reduction to the status of a tool of other men's concupiscence. Man has no factual existence, qua man.

"What is man that Thou art mindful of him?" is still the question, to which there is no objective or absolute answer, certainly not in any immanent sense.

The restoration of a truly symbolic understanding of who we are lies at the heart of a restoration of true theology and its recovery from the bastard definitions which have come to dominate modern thought. Which is why preaching to a congregation suffering from mass identify crisis is wasted. We don't know who we are, and simply to revert to a slogan, such as, "we are children of God," absent the interior awareness of our symbolic nature, falls on deaf ears, and we go about our lives trying to "actualize our existence," to "define ourselves," by being "religious," or perhaps being "more religious," or become more active in the Church, or perhaps "joining a monastery." The goal should be to eliminating this false concept of the self from our consciousness. To consider the "I" as simply one of many perspectives on reality, and not something that exists. There is no "I" there.

[Leandros]

The issue of "symbols of reality" versus "symbols of beyond reality" is a major Orthodox theological issue that is addressed, continuously, by the Church from the first day of Pentecost until today.

"consciousness" is not a delusion.

Once a man "had the great honor and blessing to transport elder Paisios somewhere with his car (http://sgpm.goarch.org/Monastery/index.php?p=38) and had asked elder Paisios : “Elder, tell me about God, speak to me, how is he?”. "The elder did not speak and he continued to drive, on curves furthermore on the mountain".

Then, the man experienced a similar experience that another layman had experienced by the side of St Serapheim of Sarov:

"My God! I began suddenly feeling God everywhere. In the car, outside on the mountains, far in the distant galaxies. He was everywhere, he filled everything, but he was nothing of all of these things...

I lived in a form of… ecstasy, a type of intoxication, without however having lost my senses and my contact with the material world. A “vigilant intoxication” as the ancient ascetics and Saints characterize it in their writings.

As if someone pulled away a curtain from my mind, from my soul, and I began living in the same world on the one hand, but in the whole world, whereas first I lived in a part of it.

Imagine a deaf person who suddenly begins hearing. He lived in the same world, but without the sounds. Now he hears too.

Imagine a blind person who suddenly begins seeing. The same world now has images and colors too....

At some moment I began telling the Elder these things I am feeling. He was not speaking. He did not want me to speak of these. He did not want me to realize that he was the cause.... "

[Owen Jones]

Good message. Thanks.

[Leandros]

From the writings of Greek Orthodox theologian Dionysios Papachristodoulou (student of Father J. Romanides):

In our (contemporary) language the “symbol” is 1) an “image”, a creature or thing that represents a concept 2) a person that incarnates and personates an idea or emotion 3) anything, in general, that can represent abstract ideas, facts, concepts or feelings.

For example, a dove is the “symbol” of peace and this meaning is linked with the specific functionality of particularization, it is linked with the specific ascription of the abstract “reality” of peace. In this context, words are “symbols” which can receive specific meaning. Provided that the internal of holy words-symbols is filled by divine realization, by studying the Scriptures or the Creed of the Faith, it is possible to learn about God. Therefore, in symbols-words there is an analogy of faith (analogia fidei).

But for the Greeks, the “symbol” is an object in the service of the identification, of the meeting, of the communication. The original meaning of the Greek word “symbol” comes from the Greek verb “symballw” that means “to contribute”. The original meaning of the word “symbol” was that of “identification mark”, which was consisted in an object that was separated in two and which permitted two complete strangers, who had in their possession each one of the separated fragments, to identify each other by putting together the separated pieces. The two pieces, which were assembled in harmony as one object, are the literal meaning of “symbol”. Ancient Greek cities also used “symbols” in order to authenticate ambassadors from far away. A “symbol” actually consists from two complementary parts that allows their carriers to be mutually recognized as “one of ours” and to meet each other in trust.

In a “symbol”, there is no hidden occultistic mysticism and (this is the most important) there is NO ANALOGY whatsoever. On the contrary, the two parts of a “symbol” are reverse. In case the one part is concave, the other one is convex, or else they would not match.

The Church of Christ has used the cultural body of the Greeks. We are called to confess the Christian SYMBOL (Creed of Faith), to hold the proper “piece” in order to be identified as genuine members of His Body, by the Head that is Christ. Yes, we are called to confess, but in the Christian way and not in the Judaic way.

There is a great difference between symbolic and allegoric method. The allegoric method, as it is used today, is the method of metaphor, which is the way to express a reality by a parallel reality.

But, the Church Fathers had used the anagogic methodology because they wanted to introduce us, to “tune” us, in the reality “beyond” any parallel reality, in THE REALITY of the Lord. Therefore they had considered as basic problems the ignorance, the oblivion and the indolence: the ignorance of noetic prayer and the oblivion, as the deduction of experience of THE REALITY, which result in indolence.

A “symbol” is an object originated from “creation” that helps us to feel or to remember one of our experiences which matches in a suitable way (not absolutely and in analogy) with another created or uncreated reality. As a symbol can be used everything that can contribute to the “tune-up” of a created being so that it may meet with “the other”. When this mortal being is dressed in “the Other” in Baptism, he/she is called Christian.

The Christian knows that there is no analogy, so he understands the Christian Dogma as a symbol that is accepted to be confessed with the Church, even if he/she personally disagrees with it. Christian Dogma is not an ideology that is needed to be accepted without objection.

Christian Dogma is like having an ill child from cold: you go to the doctor and ask for antibiotics and the doctor prescribes anti-inflammatory instead. Well, for the good of your child you have to go to the drugstore and to “confess” with the doctor the right prescription. The doctor’s prescription is the “symbol” of healing, only if the patient’s father accepts to experience it – even contrary to his pleasure.

A symbol is always in need for a relation and it is meaningless without one."

[Andrey Vershinin]

as for my understanding, it feels to me as if alot of things were liberated under the touch of God, even in words, such as Lov., When it seems that such a word is so small to describe basic things, the word has undertaken a entirely new meaning and definition when God has touched upon the word; hence the factly based notion that is "God is love"

I hope you all understand what I mean, as I saw the above post as a hiddenly simple understanding which was only alive through salvation

God be merciful to me a sinner

[Kosmas Damianides]

May God Forgive Me

Thank you Fr Raphael for correcting me.

I obviously meant to say (in my rush)that these visions though mystical and symbolic, represent another reality which we cannot understand fully in our own reality which we live.

There are two realities or rhelms/kingdoms. The spiritual and the material, the eternal and the corruptible.

In XC

Kosmas

[Boulos]

In Psalm 35 for example is one of many references which also reflects about toll gates. (p35:11)

In Christ.

[S. John]

Greetings!

I have a question concerning the toll houses and what happens to those debts owed when one becomes Baptised and Chrismated. As I am studying up for my Baptism I am reading that when this act happens that "the old man" (who would have been the one who committed the sins?) is put to death and I put on the New Man (complete with a new name).

In this context, if I was able to have fully repented of any old sins, would not the act of Baptism, Chrismation, true repentance and asking of forgiveness of sins I might commit as a Christiam, and the regular participation in the Mysteries have an effect on my passage through the toll houses? I recently purchased Fr. Seraphim's book on the topic but have only read one chapter so far.

Thanks for any comments on the above.

God Bless,
Stephen

[Hieromonk Ambrose]

I'd like to post, with permission, Juretta Heckscher's message on the toll-houses.

Click here for Original web page... (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Orthodox-Forum/message/29744)

Thu May 1, 2003 7:08 am

Toll Houses: dogma, a logic of damnation, and taking the implications seriously

To judge by this and other discussions on other Orthodox lists I'vebeen involved in, the topic of the toll-houses is a perennial source of agitation.

In fairness, I must say frankly that I remain deeply sceptical of the toll-house belief, at least as I understand to be its fully developed form: (a) that after death each person enters into a series of terrifying accusatory encounters with demons, who in each of many successive "toll houses" or trials (b) test him to find whether he has been guilty of a specific type of sin, and ( c ) if they find him guilty (i.e., not having repented and been absolved) of any one of those sins, take him to Hell to await the Last Judgment; in addition, I understand that (d) the demons also try to tempt him to surrender to sin even in death so that they may take him to Hell even if his earthly life alone has not altogether warranted it. (My comments below however pertain to the belief whether or not part (d) is considered to be part of it.) Nevertheless, despite my scepticism, I really do remain open to persuasion on the subject, and am posting this message in that spirit.

Fr. Ambrose and Steve Marin have strikingly raised the possibility that the toll-house belief, though acknowledgedly not dogma or doctrine, seems to be developing into such in some parts of the Orthodox Church. With that insight in mind, I pose the following interrelated questions to Father John and others who accept the belief in the toll houses. I do so respectfully and in a sincere spirit of inquiry, not wishing to score "points" but truly to understand the beliefs of others, and their full implications, as I struggle with this concept myself. My basic contention--of which I am happy to be disabused--is that the toll-house belief cannot be optional, cannot be theologoumenon: if it has any validity, it must be recognized as dogma, because it presents a logic that significantly modifies certain essential elements of Orthodox understanding.

1. The question of dogma, or doctrine. If the toll-houses are real, how can they not be dogma? For any one of us as individuals, the difference between (1) knowing that we will live and die as sinners but must nevertheless struggle in all our imperfection to repent and trust joyfully in God's mercy, looking forward eagerly to meeting Him "face to face" after death, and (2), alternatively, knowing that despite God's will for us, any sin that remains on our souls at death is sufficient to doom us to Hell in the company of our demonic adjudicators, is more than a matter of life and death; it is a matter of eternal life and eternal death. It is the difference between dying in realistic sorrow for one's sins yet realistic joyful trust in God and dying in realistic terror of the decisive demonic trials that are to come. It is the difference, in other words, between having ultimate hope in spite of all that we have done and having ultimate terror in spite of all that Christ has done. So I ask: how can a belief with such all-important consequences not be regarded as dogma? Why has there not been more of an effort to have this belief recognized as such? (By contrast, one must at least do the Roman Church the justice to acknowledge that once Catholics came to believe in Purgatory, they were right to recognize its momentous importance and enshrine it as dogma.) Perhaps the "development of dogma/doctrine" problem that Fr. Ambrose and Steve Marin identify in relation to the toll houses is in fact not a problem but a welcome step necessary to complete the Orthodox understanding of salvation and damnation, much as St. Gregory Palamas's defense of Hesychasm completed the Orthodox understanding of the nature of theosis.

2. The question of our sinful nature. As Orthodox, we know--intellectually at first, perhaps, but also eventually in our hearts, as we continue to struggle spiritually--that our sinfulness is more than a matter of specific sins; it is a matter of a condition of sinfulness, a constant state of blindness and self-centeredness that keeps us from loving God and others as we are called to do, and that guarantees that even a few seconds after receiving absolution, we will almost certainly have sinned again, if only by not being fully aware of the beauty and lovableness of the first person we meet as we walk out of church after confession. We sin, yes, but in some ways the deeper problem is that we sin because we are sinful. (Those better than I at memorizing Scripture can here supply the appropriate Pauline texts.) How does the belief in the toll houses, with its affirmation of specific trials for specific areas of sin, address this understanding that the real problem is in some sense not "sins" but sinfulness; not so much (except in obvious dire cases, such as murder) any particular act committed or omitted, but our very condition; not the parts, but the whole that is more--or, perhaps, less--than the sum of the parts?

3. The question of the nature of God's justice in contrast with human and demonic justice (and here I do not mean primarily the very problematic "fact" that in the toll houses it is the demons who judge us, the demons who execute Divine justice). God's justice, as St. Isaac the Syrian says, has almost nothing to do with human justice; what is "just" about His sacrificial love for us? What is "just" about the halting and reluctant steps of the Prodigal being met by the outpouring of forgiveness and generosity from his father? (One thinks also of the profound Russian folktale Dostoevsky recounts in The Brothers Karamazov, about the woman in Hell who was almost released from it because she had once shared an onion with a beggar--but at the last minute she claimed the onion as hers exclusively, and so slipped back into Hell.) Such an understanding turns the toll-house belief on its head: the toll houses tell us that one unrepented sin is enough to damn us; the Gospels, St. Isaac (among many others), and the theological wisdom of traditional Russian culture tell us that God seeks endlessly to find some way to save us, and suggest that one spontaneous act of love or repentance can give Him the lever He longs to find to release us into His mercy. How can these two beliefs be reconciled?

4. The question of the nature of Hell. In accordance with our bedrock belief in God's absolute love, at the heart of Orthodox Tradition concerning Hell is the radical insight of St. Isaac and others (including St. Paul, as in the great passage in Romans 8 about how nothing can separate us from the love of Christ) that Hell is the condition of being so opposed to God in one's inward being that the fire of His love is experienced as torment. (See the justly famous article by Dr. Alexandre Kalomiros, "The River of Fire," for a modern exposition of this understanding.) This belief does indeed seem to recognize that the problem is not so much any individual sin, determinative though such can be, as the sum of sinfulness or unsinfulness that shapes the ultimate condition of the person for eternity: in the end, in my inmost heart, am I fundamentally turned toward God, however incompletely and despite my sinfulness and failings, or am I fundamentally opposed to Him, despite whatever superficial gestures I may have made in the direction of righteousness? That is the difference between salvation and damnation, between knowing Love as torment and knowing Love as joy. As an Orthodox, I have always found this belief stunningly clear and compelling. But how then can one reconcile such a belief with the toll-house belief and its teaching that whatever the fundamental orientation of the person, he (or she) may indeed be sentenced to Hell if the demons find him guilty in any specific area of sin?

5. The question of the nature of sin. By the same token, doesn't the toll-house belief teach us to see sin not as "missing the mark" (the literal translation of the Greek hamartia)--that is, as a misdirection of energies against Love, as the Fathers taught--but as a series of legal infractions for which we will be legally accountable? (See Christos Yannaras's brilliant work The Freedom of Morality for an exposition of the Orthodoxy of the former understanding and the heterodoxy of the latter.) And is it not just such juridical legalism for which Orthodox take Roman Catholics so heavily to task? Yet the whole problematic realm of Catholic teaching on this subject--merits, indulgences, expiatory suffering in Purgatory, and so forth--at least expounds a logic of salvation, however imperfectly conceived; the toll houses, by contrast, expound a logic of damnation.

6. The question of the meaning of the Resurrection. In the shadow of the toll houses, what is the meaning of the Resurrection for any one of us? The demons of the toll houses will try us for sin after sin, and if we are found guilty in any one of the "houses" of trial, we are damned. I would venture to say that this makes it very likely that most of us will be damned, and almost certain if we die in any state other than that of immediate and complete repentance, confession, and absolution. (We might wish to argue that prayers for the dead can release them from Hell up until the Last Judgement, but to make that the usual means of salvation would be to replace Christ's saving sacrifice with the Church's saving prayer as the decisive soteriological element in the destiny of most human beings.) Most of humanity, even most Orthodox, will therefore go to the demons; Hell will be teeming, and Heaven the abode of the rare few, the righteous remnant. (Even should I have any reason to suppose that I myself may be able to elude the demons, I can at death look with sober confidence on all whom I love in this world in the safe assumption that I am parting from them forever, that nearly all human love will founder in oblivion on the rock of Divine and demonic justice as the vast sinning majority of mankind is consigned to eternal fire: such is the logic of the toll houses.) Of course, it is not necessary to believe in the toll houses to believe that most people will be damned--most American Protestants, for example, have historically believed this--but the toll-house belief does seem to present the problem to Orthodox Christians in the starkest terms.

What then is the nature of our confidence in Christ's Resurrection? Is it not simply the affirmation of a metaphysical possibility that we know full well is unlikely to be realized in our own lives or those of nearly all others? Perhaps so; perhaps that is the final meaning of Christ's pronouncement that "many are called, but few are chosen."

But if this be true, what in the world do we do with our Paschal proclamations, with St. Paul's confident joy, with the joyful assurance of salvation that permeated the early Church, with the historical fact that it was belief in the momentous significance of the Resurrection that ignited the spread of Christianity from its earliest days? Why did St. Serafim of Sarov typically greet visitors with the words "my joy, Christ is Risen!," if the unspoken corollary was, "--but in truth, you are probably damned anyway"? Why did St. Silouan of Mt. Athos declare that "Love could not bear" to see anyone in Hell? As Fr. Ambrose reminded us, St. John Chrysostom's Paschal Homily proclaims, "let none fear death, for the death of the Savior has set us free"--but, however much we may struggle with our weakness, if we do so honestly we will know our perennial failure to avoid sin, and if we believe in the toll houses we must therefore face death, if it is not simultaneous with complete confession and absolution, in a state of abject terror. ( Let us hope therefore to die in an Orthodox home or an Orthodox hospital so that our appropriate terror may not discourage unbelievers from joining the Church.)

So I ask again: Why does the Resurrection seem to mean so much to us Orthodox if its effect on the eternal state of any one of us is likely to be nil?

Of course I am fully aware of the teachings throughout our Tradition, but particularly in Christ's parables and in the writings of ascetics throughout the ages, that counsel us to be mindful always of the nearness of death and therefore of the very real possibility that any of our acts or thoughts may turn us decisively from God and onto the path toward Hell. But it has always seemed to me that this is a matter of taking our eternal course seriously and recognizing the eternal implications of all our acts, whether loving or evil, trivial or momentous: it is not that we are to be terrified of being caught breaking the rules even at the last moment, as the toll-house belief would teach us, but that we are to recognize that our lives unceasingly weave a pattern which points us toward eternal life or eternal death, and that death itself is the symbol and gateway of our passage into eternity.

Yet Orthodoxy surely also teaches that such constant repentant awareness of death can only be understood and lived aright if it is paradoxically infused and balanced with an absolute, unreasonable, unjust, unshakable, and entire trust and confidence in Christ's love, in His mercy, and in the truth that His Death and Resurrection have indeed opened for us the gates of the Kingdom in spite of all that we have done and will forever do to hang Him upon the Cross. My human logic cannot resolve that paradox, but I have always believed that as an Orthodox Christian I must hold to it with my last breath and therefore refuse to despair even as I acknowledge my endless sins. The teaching about the toll houses, however, seems to me to tilt the balance-beam of anguish and trust decisively in the direction of anguish; it seems to me to replace the realism of Paschal joy with a realism of terror; it seems to me to make the demons, rather than Christ Himself, the mediator(s) between God and man after death; and it seems to me to make the decisive encounter after death not that between the person and God but that between the person and demons. And it seems to me to make participation in Christ's Resurrection a faint hope; a gallant belief to be maintained for strategic purposes against all odds, perhaps, but one that is very, very unlikely to be realized.

Please understand, again, that I am not raising these questions facetiously; I am truly struggling to understand how a belief that seems to me redolent of the imagination (though not of course of the specific tenets) of Calvinism, and more portentous in its exacting legalism than the most legalistic elements of the Latin heritage, can be believed by so many to be central to Orthodoxy--and whether it is therefore indeed incumbent on me as an Orthodox Christian to accept it. Note that I am not arguing the origins, geographic breadth, or historical depth of the belief; those are separate and obviously intensely contentious questions, but I'm willing to accept for the sake of argument that the toll-house belief is both ancient and widespread within Orthodoxy (though I can't resist paraphrasing St. Cyprian of Carthage to the effect that the ancientness of a belief may simply be an indication of the persistence of error). My concern is rather with the implications of the toll-house belief, because it seems to me that these are so important that they must be explored and acknowledged in the light of Tradition and the belief itself accordingly either rejected as a misguided overinterpretation of some of the metaphorical glimpses the Lord has offered to certain pious people concerning a subject He wishes us to entrust almost entirely to Him--or accepted as far more important to Orthodoxy than even most of its ardent proponents have hitherto been willing to recognize.

Am I wrong?

Yours in Christ,

--Jurretta Heckscher

[Fr Raphael Vereshack]

Greetings Hieromonk Ambrose!

If I remember correctly this discussion was ongoing between you & Fr John Shaw at one time on the rocor (and other) lists. At the time I only 'lurked' because you all knew much better than I about these things and anyway...it was a great education just to watch.

My feeling then as now is that this issue - and this also goes for the replies on the Orthodox Forum list to this question- needs to be understood in a balanced way. The evidence for the toll houses to my way of thinking is far too overwhelming and from far too many saints to be dismissed as paganism. I think it is from this important witness that we need to work out a theology which would avoid the two extremes of thinking there can be no testing at all from evil spirits at the time of our death or that this testing negates the ultimate mercy of God.

I have hopefully learned a bit from Monachos (especially from Matthew our faithful moderator) and one point he continually stresses is the tendency we have to think of God's mercy in a very restrictive and human way. So, related to the toll houses there is no need to pit testing and God's mercy so diametrically against each other. After all certainly the experience of testing is implicit in dying itself. And for that matter it is also implicit in the life we have been allowed by God with all of its trials, sicknesses and so on. The thing of it is though that this is not a negation of God's mercy but rather the very way in which God's mercy works.

Of course as others have also pointed out we do not want to make these accounts too absolute. In the lives of saints we see many different accounts of the toll houses which often differ in character and point. For example I think in the life of St Niphon the angels come to the rescue of the saint who is being tried and chase the demons away. Also we read in some lives of how the demons in their testing are actually lying about the dying person's sins and the dying person eventually tells the lying demons to leave. The point here I think is that testing is not about evil having the upper hand. Rather it seems to involve the person employing the discernment to cast themselves upon the mercy of God rather than on the judgement of the demons- which means in some way a reliance on one's self. And maybe if such testing does occur this is what it ultimately means- that before the threat of evil we would learn to cast ourselves before the mercy of God rather than our own limited human resources. If this is so then it is only natural that this test of discernment be given us especially as we begin the ultimate test of faith- which is the endurance of death.


In Christ- Fr Raphael

[Boulos]

In the toll houses issue, demons do not judge someone but they do underline and accuse. Thus some about real unrepented sins which were being recorded while in life, also, they falsy accuse for sins which could be also never commited in true life.

The judgement is done by our Lord, in the last day afterwards, not by those so called " powers of the air".

[Vasilis Kirikos]

Re: "In the toll houses issue" I have or had a copy of that book concerning "toll houses". After reading the first few chapters it got me very upset. I asked a cousin about it and he told me that most Christian theologians disregard such theories as so much conjecture without any real theological basis. I don't know if he actually knew what he was talking about or not; but I was relieved and so I put the book away, I know not where. Anyway, perhaps I was too hasty to believe my cousin who is also NOT a theologian, as I am not. Anyone have something to add? Was I too hasty in disregarding such theology? I hope I was not. Vasilis

[Byron Jack Gaist]

Dear Fr Raphael, Hieromonk Ambrose, all.

Fr Raphael writes:


And maybe if such testing does occur this is what it ultimately means- that before the threat of evil we would learn to cast ourselves before the mercy of God rather than our own limited human resources. If this is so then it is only natural that this test of discernment be given us especially as we begin the ultimate test of faith- which is the endurance of death.

This seems to me a brilliant way of reconciling the very real issues Juretta Heckscher raises so ably and eloquently in her text. Ever since I read about the toll-houses in Fr Seraphim Rose's book, I've felt what can only be described as terror at the thought. I know for certain I won't be able to offer up enough excuses to justify my many sins. The balance of the scales is tipped heavily against me. If Fr Raphael is correct that this is a moment of ultimate testing which requires not our excuses but our courageous trust in Divine Mercy despite everything, then there is reason to go on praying. The Mother of God will chase away the demons far from our soul, and accompany us to the bosom of Abraham, but we have to trust her and her Divine Son.

Is it possible that the Orthodox understanding of sin is that sin is both a misdirection of energies against Love, and a disease of the soul, which unfortunately together result in a transgression of Divine Law? Are our sins on the one hand indeed counted up, enumerated in the book of our lives as infractions against God's Will, Rule and Law,yet on the other hand rubbed out by the same hand that wrote them in in an act of miraculous mercy, provided we trust? I don't want to suggest that we are saved by faith alone, but by both faith and works, although our works will never be sufficient in themselves.

I guess there is something both loving and frightening (awesome) about God. What do others think?

In Christ
Byron

[Hieromonk Ambrose]

The great theological problem witrh the toll house theory is that it is impossible to tack down the features of this amorphous "doctrine." No contemporary toll house proponent will ever make the attempt to say precisely what they believe and how it relates to traditional Orthodox soteriology. While they can and do appeal to the teaching of some of the Saints, both St Theodora and St Ignaty Brianchaninov, they also reject some of the most important points of the teachings of these same Saints. They advocate an attenuated teaching of the toll houses which would be rejected by the "toll house Saints" themselves (if I may call them that simply for convenience.)

So, it is a bit messy and smorgasbordy. "I'll take this bit from St Basil the New, but no, I don't think I want this other bit from St Ignaty." This is not the usual way of Orthodox theological certainty which seeks for a consensus among the Fathers and among the holy Churches of God.

The bottom line is that while the toll house belief remains in this very nebulous state it is impossible to say whether it is heretical or not. I think that this is one point of Jurretta Hecksher's excellent message.

[Hieromonk Ambrose]

The great theological problem with the toll house theory is that it is impossible to tack down the features of this amorphous "doctrine." No contemporary toll house proponent will ever make the attempt to say precisely what they believe and how it relates to traditional Orthodox soteriology. While they can and do appeal to the teaching of some of the Saints, both St Theodora and St Ignaty Brianchaninov, they also reject some of the most important points of the teachings of these same Saints. They advocate an attenuated teaching of the toll houses which would be rejected by the "toll house Saints" themselves (if I may call them that simply for convenience.)

So, it is a bit messy and smorgasbordy. "I'll take this bit from St Basil the New, but no, I don't think I want this other bit from St Ignaty." This is not the usual way of Orthodox theological certainty which seeks for a consensus among the Fathers and among the holy Churches of God.

The bottom line is that while the toll house belief remains in this very nebulous state it is impossible to say whether it is heretical or not. I think that this is one point of Jurretta Hecksher's excellent message.

[Fr Raphael Vereshack]

Dear Fr Ambrose,

Maybe part of the problem is with trying to clear up too many of the ambiguities. Heresy itself often results from trying to clear up too many of the ambiguities. Doctrine also- even the most central doctrine such as the Incarnation- has something ambiguous to it but yet also is a life-saving truth.

In Christ- Fr Raphael

[Hieromonk Ambrose]

You may be right, Father. The angels who supposedly taught Saint Theodora about the toll houses informed her that the non-Orthodox don't even make it to the toll houses. Being non-Orthodox they are doomed anyway and are taken straight to hell. The angels also taught her a system of utilising the merits of others which can be applied to the soul going through the toll houses where it is short of enough merits of its own. It is redolent of Roman Catholicism's "merits of the Saints" and of indulgences.

Fr Seraphim Rose teaches that a man who is spiritually developed may see the toll houses operating in the air above his head.

It is these concrete teachings and others which make us non tollers recoil in horror and reject the whole theory.

If people were content to leave it as Fr Michael Pomazansky describes it, simply as movements in the soul by which the Partial Judgement takes place at death, then it may be more acceptable. But I suppose that if we reduce it to Fr Michael's perception there is really nothing left of the toll houses and we may as well discard the term.

PS: apologies for the double posting. I have not yet learnt how to work this Forum. Please delete one if you wish.

[Father David Moser]

Fr Ambrose stated:


The great theological problem witrh the toll house theory is that it is impossible to tack down the features of this amorphous "doctrine." No contemporary toll house proponent will ever make the attempt to say precisely what they believe and how it relates to traditional Orthodox soteriology.

A couple of thoughts

First is that not only is the "toll house doctrine" difficult to define, but any alternative is equally as "amorphous" The simple fact is that we are all dealing in "images" (or "icons") which reveal a little bit of an incomprehensible reality. We cannot fully and concretely describe the life after death and the nature of the spiritual world because it is beyond our experience in this life (much like the flight of a butterfly would be completely beyond the ability of a caterpillar to comprehend).

Secondly, I think that there is no "toll house doctrine" as such - In my experience those who insist on it being a "doctrine" are those who wish to pin it down so they can refute it. At bit like a "straw man". We do know that the life we live in this world affects the life in the next. We also know that we are in some way accountable for our sins. This is the only "doctrine". How we conceptualize this doctrine is not the doctrine itself, but simply one or another ways of explaining the doctrine. Different explanations or "icons" work for different people.

There is room in the Church for many different descriptions of life after death, it is important to always remember that none of them are "literal" or a true expression of the reality they seek to express.

Fr David Moser

[Hieromonk Ambrose]

There is room in the Church for many different descriptions of life after death, it is important to always remember that none of them are "literal" or a true expression of the reality they seek to express.

I am not sure if there is room for many different descriptions. The Synod of Bishops of ROCA issued a Resolution in December 1980 that speculations about life after death beyond the very little which Christ has revealed to us is not spiritually beneficial to our salvation. That would seem to include descriptions and conceptualisations about an incomprehensible reality when such theories take us much further than Christ's revelation about what occurs after death.

One of the bishops is recorded in the Minutes: "I propose that we ought to follow the advice of Bishop Theophan," to terminate our speculation as regards the accounts of what takes place in the spiritual world."

[Stephen]

Fr Ambrose stated:
>>The great theological problem witrh the toll house theory is that it is impossible to tack down the features of this amorphous "doctrine." No contemporary toll house proponent will ever make the attempt to say precisely what they believe and how it relates to traditional Orthodox soteriology. <<

A couple of thoughts

First is that not only is the "toll house doctrine" difficult to define, but any alternative is equally as "amorphous" The simple fact is that we are all dealing in "images" (or "icons") which reveal a little bit of an incomprehensible reality. We cannot fully and concretely describe the life after death and the nature of the spiritual world because it is beyond our experience in this life (much like the flight of a butterfly would be completely beyond the ability of a caterpillar to comprehend).

Secondly, I think that there is no "toll house doctrine" as such - In my experience those who insist on it being a "doctrine" are those who wish to pin it down so they can refute it. At bit like a "straw man". We do know that the life we live in this world affects the life in the next. We also know that we are in some way accountable for our sins. This is the only "doctrine". How we conceptualize this doctrine is not the doctrine itself, but simply one or another ways of explaining the doctrine. Different explanations or "icons" work for different people.

There is room in the Church for many different descriptions of life after death, it is important to always remember that none of them are "literal" or a true expression of the reality they seek to express.

Fr David Moser

Greetings Fr. Moser,

After reading this thread I am still not clear about what effect baptism, confession and the eucharist has on past sins in relation to the toll houses.

I ask this not to pin the doctrine down and refute it but because I am going to be baptised this Saturday and will be giving a life confession tomorrow. I am told by my priest that whatever I confess will be completely forgiven as if it never happened. How does this - and other future confessed sins and participation in the eucharist during my new Orthodox life - play into what is "owed" at the toll houses? Are not those sins forgiven? Could somebody please explain this???

God Bless,
Stephen

[Father David Moser]

All your sins are forgiven - there is no question about that. As long as you truly repent and confess your sins, then you need not worry about "toll houses' at all. You "owe" nothing, your sins are forgiven.

Fr David Moser

[Stephen]

All your sins are forgiven - there is no question about that. As long as you truly repent and confess your sins, then you need not worry about "toll houses' at all. You "owe" nothing, your sins are forgiven.

Fr David Moser

Thank you for answering!

God Bless,
Stephen

[M.C. Steenberg]

Dear Stephen,

I was very happy to see Fr David's reply to your message. Especially in this time of Holy Week and Pascha, the assurance of absolution offered through Christ for the confession of sins must be remembered; it cannot get 'bogged down' in the discussion of 'toll houses', etc.

Especially today, the commemoration of the Passion itself, a reminder that the only sins that surmount God's forgiveness are those for which the sinner refuses to receive that forgiveness (see the hymns regarding Judas as chanted during the antiphons of the twelve passion Gospels).

INXC, Matthew

[Ken McRae]

"I first heard about Elder Gabriel as a great righteous one of the 20th century, during my last seminary year at Holy Trinity Monastery, Jordanville, New York. His name was mentioned in connection with the phenomenon of praying to holy men for favors, because they hear just like the saints, and are granted power to intercede before God." (Abbot Herman, of St. Herman's Monastery, in the Preface to 'One of the Ancients: The Life and Struggles of Elder Gabriel, a Russian Man of Prayer', p. 12)

Sorry to interject here, but I was wondering if someone could explain to me where this "third" class or group of souls dwells, if not in heaven with the saints, or in hell with the sinners. Are they "eternally" stuck in the Toll-Houses? If they are not in the Toll-Houses, then where are they? Will they, or can they ever achieve perfection in holiness, like the saints, and ascend fully into heaven? Do our prayers on earth work toward their release from the Toll-Houses and final ascent into heaven? And if our prayers are effectual with God, on their behalf, then how about our penances? Will God receive penances performed by us and offered to Him for their sakes? Any comments would be appreciated. Thanks!

[Ken McRae]

The angels also taught her a system of utilising the merits of others which can be applied to the soul going through the toll houses where it is short of enough merits of its own. It is redolent of Roman Catholicism's "merits of the Saints" and of indulgences.

Sorry, I missed this statement last night before making my previous post. I see now that if I had read a little more carefully, I would have noticed answers to most of my questions. At any rate, I'd still like to know if Abbot Herman's distinction between saints and holy souls is generally received by all Orthodox believers, or just the "toll-house" adherents? And if the practise of praying to these holy souls for favors is merely another aspect of the "toll-house" teaching, or something generally practised by all Orthodox Christians? Secondly, did all the "toll-house" saints, and particularly Saint Ignaty Brianchaninov, accept this teaching on "utilising the merits of others" to assist these holy souls in their ascent through the toll-houses? Lastly, has Father Seraphim Rose given us a detailed explanation of this practise (of "utilising the merits of others" to assist the toll-house occupants)?

[Ken McRae]

I'd still like to know if Abbot Herman's distinction between saints and holy souls is generally received by all Orthodox believers, or just the "toll-house" adherents?

Well, I thought maybe I should apologize if I asked the wrong questions. I assure you that I was not looking for a "polemical" debate. Nor was I aware of the situation with Fr. Herman, which I only learned about tonight. I went back to the first page of this thread, and clicked on a link provided there, >> http://www.pomona.edu/Magazine/PCMSP01/saint.shtml <<, near the beginning of the thread, started to read, and came to this passage:-

"Although the daily rhythms of monastic life remained the same, there were changes at Platina in the years after Rose was buried there. Fr. Alexey described them in his Orthodox America article as "sad and, frankly, terrible events." According to him, there was a falling out between Rose and Podmoshensky, known as Fr. Herman, shortly before Rose's death.

"Fr. Herman, the monastery's abbot, was suspended from priestly duties in 1985 and formally defrocked four years later after conflicts with the church hierarchy. The brotherhood that he and Rose had co-founded in the 1960s was disassociated from the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia, but Fr. Herman continued to serve as a cleric under a non-canonical bishop. Last fall, he retired from active involvement in the brotherhood. He lives in seclusion not far from Platina." [END]

This discovery made me very sad, I must confess. I had heard a few times in the past of these problems, but never knew the severity or full extent of them. My heart aches even now as I write this, 'cause the St. Herman Brotherhood played a very special role in my exposure to Orthodoxy.

I came to find out about Orthodoxy through an unusual route. Mouravieff 's Triology was in my possession, and it's repeated reference to the Philokalia eventually led me to purchase a copy of it along with a copy of 'the Way of the Pilgrim'. Having laid aside the cryptic writings of Mouravieff, I started to work on these Orthodox books. Up to that point in time, though, I still had'nt set foot inside an Orthodox Church, and would'nt for several months later.

Then, while on a business trip in Cleveland, Ohio, I felt inwardly compelled to skip the conference I was there to attend, and pay a special visit to the OCA Church there. It was a Saturday night and a totally spontaneous decision on my part. As it turned out, it was a special night, as that OCA Church was celebrating its 100th Anniversary! (Edit: Actually, while memory is beginning to fade a little, it occurs to me that I also visited a Coptic church twice, around this time, but I'm not entirely certain if this was before or after my first visit to the OCA.) The OCA priest in Cleveland spent two hours with me, after the Liturgy. To make a long story short, I was encouraged to visit the OCA Church in Toronto, Ontario, which I did, and continued to do over the next year and a half, or so.

While attending there, though, I never once heard about the "defrocking" of Father Herman, even though I had not kept my love of 'the Orthodox Word', or for the St. Herman Brotherhood, a secret. I became well acquainted with a very kind and devout Orthodox lady there. She eventually convinced me to visit St. Vladimir's Seminary, which I did. I spent a week there and attended several classes. So, I started to read the writings of Fathers Schmemann, Meyendorff, and Hopko. Despite their great "academic" value, I did not find them to speak to my heart in the same way, or on the same level as did the books published by the St. Herman Brotherhood.

It's hard for me to remember at present just how I came to learn about 'the Orthodox Word' and the St. Herman Brotherhood, but I think it was through the Orthodox peridiodical edited and published by Franky Schaffer, a convert from Protestantism. That was the first periodical I signed up for, followed by 'the Orthodox Word' next. Then slowly, I discovered and subscribed to them all, even a Coptic orthodox journal. For a couple years, I subscribed to literally every Orthodox periodical and journal published in every jurisdiction of North America!

In general, the ROCOR periodicals appealed to me the most. However, if I were to speak very candidly, I would say that of them all, 'the Orthodox Word' was, by far, my very favorite!! According to my best judgment, I would say that the St. Herman Brotherhood, through its periodical and many fine publications, played the biggest part or role of all in "setting the hook" that continues to pull me, up to this very day, toward the Orthodox Church. And for that, I will be forever grateful to it (them)!

And so, indeed, does it break my heart, truthfully, to hear about the fall-out between Father's Seraphim and Herman, and especially of the latter's final end!! Is there no hope at all of his ever being "re-habilitated" or "re-stored"? As for me, Fr. Seraphim Rose is, if not a saint, one of those "holy men" that Father Herman spoke of in his Preface to 'One of the Ancients: The Life and Struggles of Elder Gabriel.' May he , that is, Fr. Seraphim Rose, pray for my soul!

[Matthew Panchisin]

Dear Theophilus,

Christ is Risen!


Secondly, did all the "toll-house" saints, and particularly Saint Ignaty Brianchaninov, accept this teaching on "utilising the merits of others" to assist these holy souls in their ascent through the toll-houses? Lastly, has Father Seraphim Rose given us a detailed explanation of this practise (of "utilising the merits of others" to assist the toll-house occupants)?

This may sound rather simple but they love God, one another and us as well. So that would be a divine type of assistance, highly recommended by the entire commmunion of the Saints. Our Job is to plug into the connection for help.

One could easily look at the Icon the Ladder of Divine Ascent and see the Saints, Angels and all the powers of heaven doing whatever they could to help save the creatures that they love and God loves. God is love and created all things visable and invisable as such He loves the process. So the invisable becomes visable when we love. Saint Siloun indicates that when he mentions the pity he felt for the fallen angels that he struggled with. We can bring to mind the Gospel account of the good Samaritan.

Luke 10:33
But a certain Samaritan, as he journeyed, came where he was. And when he saw him, he had compassion.

The Blessed Theophylact mentions;

"But the Saviour as Maker of all, knowing that all men are one creation, defines neighbour not according to deeds or merits, but according to human nature."

Here is a link in context for reference if anybody is interested.

http://www.chrysostompress.org/explanation/pentecost_25?CPSESSION=41b438f05f33a5f74a8fb0657f2 cacf9



In Christ,

Matthew Panchisin

[Ken McRae]

(Edit: Actually, while memory is beginning to fade a little, it occurs to me that I also visited a Coptic church twice, around this time, but I'm not entirely certain if this was before or after my first visit to the OCA.)

I've been reflecting more on this particular event, and it has now occured to me that it took place in the spring of 1995, and prior to even my acquisition of Mouravieff's Triology. I remember being deeply moved or touched by the spiritual beauty of the liturgy there, and that was instrumental in my decision to look deeper and longer into the Orthodox Church. But almost a year would pass before my visit to the Cleveland church. At least that's how I remember it at present. I've also been trying to remember how I first acquired a copy of 'The Christian Activist', which is the title of Frank Schaeffer's Orthodox periodical. (Btw, apologies for referring to him as 'Franky' in my last post, but as I recall, that's how he use to refer to himself before his conversion to Orthodoxy.) As I recall, it was very shortly after I started attending the OCA church; I believe I was invited to attend some kind of pan-Orthodox gathering where free copies were being handed out. But that was the start of what, in hind-sight, has been a rather long journey for me. Please forgive the off-topic digression.

Of all the Orthodox teachings that came to my attention in the early stages, and which exerted the deepest and profoundest attraction on me, concerned the Chrisitan calling to become a "living" link in (and to) the "living" Tradition of the Church. It is very difficult to express how deeply this particular teaching resonated within my soul; but it seems to me as though it was this particular aspect or emphasis within the 'Orthodox Word' journal, and the teachings of Father Seraphim Rose, that really "hooked" me in the earliest stage, and began drawing me in. Father Alexey Young played an important role in this, as I acquired a couple cassette tapes of a talk he gave at one time, in which he expounded at large on his spiritual inheritance from Father Seraphim Rose. He placed a special emphasis on this aspect of Fr. Seraphim's teaching, and, of course, from that time on, I watched carefully for this particular emphasis in everything I read and heard after that. Of all the Brotherhood's publications, those which highlighted and emphasized this aspect, like the series on the Optina Elders, for example, were (and still are) highly favored by myself.

Now, to travel full-circle and "hook-up" again with the subject of the thread, I must say it seems to me that at least one reason, if not the absolute primary reason why Father Seraphim Rose "clung" tenaciously to the tradition of the toll-houses is that it was the spiritual inheritance received "directly" from his own spiritual father. If I have understand him at all, it was his very deep and profound belief that to reject any part of the spiritual legacy received directly from his own spiritual father was tantamount to standing in judgment not just of his spiritual father but of the entire Orthodox Tradition itself !! For him to reject any part or aspect of the inheritance he received was, in his mind, to assume a spiritual posture of pride, thinking one is wiser than one's spiritual father and the whole line of spiritual fathers from which one descends, and to which one is linked through your spiritual father. The very thought of as much smelled of anathema to him. May the Lord have mercy on me, but I must say that stance assumed by Fr. Seraphim Rose appears to me as the correct one!

Now, in another thread, fr. Seraphim Black posted the following statement:-

"Simply put, to become a true monastic, there is an underlying theme, as it were - never, never, never follow your own idea, conception, understanding etc, of how things could be, should be, ought to be." (Post #14 in "Any married saints that were once monastic?" @ http://www.monachos.net/forum/showthread.php?t=2610 )

When I re[a]d the above remark by fr. Seraphim, the teaching of Father Seraphim Rose and the St. Herman Brotherhood came to my mind, with regard to the fidelity that spiritual children owe their spiritual fathers and mothers, and the inheritance handed down and received directly from them; as also typifying and embodying one's fidelity to the entire "living" Tradition of the Orthodox Church. To begin to pick and choose what you will receive from your spiritual father and what you will not is to ultimately place yourself apart from the Orthodox Tradition as a whole, and to stand in judgment of it. Now, is this the right way to penetrate and acquire the mind of the Fathers?

To be perfectly honest about it, if I were Orthodox, I could not see myself rejecting any part of the "toll-house" tradition, and most especially if it were transmitted to me directly as part and parcel of the legacy bequeathed to me by my own spiritual father. That legacy would always be kept profoundly sacred in my heart, by God's grace!! Now, may the Lord graciously help me to keep praying and studying such matters, but most of all, to enter upon the right Way. Amen.

[Ken McRae]

One could easily look at the Icon the Ladder of Divine Ascent and see the Saints, Angels and all the powers of heaven doing whatever they could to help save ...

Dear Matthew,

Thanks for your general assistance, though my question remains unresolved. It appears from "Father" Herman's Preface to 'One of the Ancients', that he was taught at Holy Trinity Seminary about a class of 'holy men' distinct from the Saints in heaven, who are given power with God to intercede for us. My question concerns the tradition of this teaching and whether it is universally received throughout the Orthodox Church.

This is a problem point for me, for at least a couple reasons, one of which can be described as a "selfish" concern about my own soul. It is difficult at best to "envision" myself among the saints in the next life, though one can only hope, of course. To be honest, as the way things stand, I would be eternally happy simply to be numbered among this seperate class of "holy" men and women, described by Father Herman.

Truly, I wish I knew of some Orthodox texts which elaborated further on this particular tradition refered to by "Father" Herman. Perhaps they are already in my possession, or have been in the past, without my knowing or realizing it. Lord willing, I will keep praying, reading, and searching. Again, many thanks for your assistance.

humbly yours,
Theophilus

[Matthew Panchisin]

Dear Theophilus,

Christ is Risen,

I wish I could help by providing some text that addresses your question. I have never heard of a class of 'holy men' distinct from the Saints in heaven, I'm assuming you mean reposed. Of course there are "holy men" that have lived that frequently "interceded" for people by praying to the Saints and others in heaven or their own prayers had been answered if they are in accordance with God's will. I believe that God's will is the most important element in such matters. If Father Herman or others have knowledge of a specific class of "holy men" that are not Saints but close or something like that I don't think that would not be a part of Orthodox thought. See below "for every righteous spirit made perfect in faith." One of the things that is often very helpful is to look at the Liturgical tradition within the Orthodox Church for confirmation or substantiation of theological or traditionally held truths. As such there is much there for you to draw from and rest in confidence with the knowledge of "yes that is so". Good reasoning and use of our God given minds can be comfortable with such ways. That is one of the reasons that you will not see Liturgical innovations that create conflicts or difficulty in coordinating different realities.

During The Holy Anaphora we can hear;

"So that they may be to those who partake of them for vigilance of soul, forgiveness of sins, communion of Your Holy Spirit, fulfillment of the kingdom of heaven, confidence before You, and not in judgment or condemnation. Again, we offer this spiritual worship for those who repose in the faith, forefathers, fathers, patriarchs, prophets, apostles, preachers, evangelists, martyrs, confessors, ascetics, and for every righteous spirit made perfect in faith."

So I guess the way I see it is that while there maybe distinctions or "classes" there is oneness in Christ as there must be.

It is difficult for anyone to "envision" oneself among the saints in the next life and that is not something that is done. What is done is that we pray for the intercessions of the Saints and hope much as you have mentioned. Your aspiration to be one of the "holy men" that Father Herman speaks of is the result of wanting to be a creature that is pleasing to God. So our hope is only in Christ our Savior and the knowledge that with God all things are possible. I sometimes call to mind the truth that God can raise children up unto Abraham from a rock, so there is always hope in Christ. Thanks be to God that we are allowed into the Church and actually give thanks rightly since there are "holy men" there. For me any man that is an Orthodox Priest is a "holy man" by God's grace and is given power with God.

I hope that didn't sound like a rant and if I ever come across any text I'll certainly pass it on to you.

In Christ,

Matthew Panchisin

[Ken McRae]

I have never heard of a class of 'holy men' distinct from the Saints in heaven, I'm assuming you mean reposed.

Dear Matthew,

Yes, I mean reposed. Maybe my Catholic conditioning is colouring the way I'm reading Father Herman's words, so perhaps I should ask how you are inclined to interpret the following passage:-

"I first heard about Elder Gabriel as a great righteous one of the 20th century, during my last seminary year at Holy Trinity Monastery, Jordanville, New York. His name was mentioned in connection with the phenomenon of praying to holy men for favors, because they hear just like the saints, and are granted power to intercede before God." (Abbot Herman, of St. Herman's Monastery, in the Preface to 'One of the Ancients: The Life and Struggles of Elder Gabriel, a Russian Man of Prayer', p. 12)

He says nothing more on the subject, that I have noticed. Perhaps I'm reading something into these words that is'nt really there, but is Father Herman talking about a class of "holy men" who have reposed, and are distinct from the saints, in regard to their degree of perfection in holiness? Perhaps he is'nt talking about "holy men" who have reposed, but then it would seem strange for him to talk about "praying to holy men" not yet reposed in the Lord. It seems as though this discussion he is referring to may have occured within a class setting at the Seminary.

With regard to "envisioning" myself among the saints, what I really mean is to see myself ever achieving "perfection in holiness", though I can, by God's grace, hope that I'll at least make a sincere start, and perhaps achieve some very small degree of purity and virtue, if the Lord wills to extend my days on earth a little longer.

humbly,
Theophilus

[Matthew Panchisin]

Dear Theophilus,



I first heard about Elder Gabriel as a great righteous one of the 20th century, during my last seminary year at Holy Trinity Monastery, Jordanville, New York. His name was mentioned in connection with the phenomenon of praying to holy men for favors, because they hear just like the saints, and are granted power to intercede before God." (Abbot Herman, of St. Herman's Monastery, in the Preface to 'One of the Ancients: The Life and Struggles of Elder Gabriel, a Russian Man of Prayer', p. 12)


There is nothing outside of what can happen "phenomenon" to me in this at all. To borrow a phrase that Bishop Ware often uses from one of his mentors; "It's all connected you see."

Saint John of Kronstandt was often asked to pray for people while he was alive and then prior to his canonization after his death that practice did not cease. So when the light of a Godbearing Father shines very brightly it is difficult to ignore it.

We read in the Psalms;

Oh, send out Your light and Your truth! Let them lead me; Let them bring me to Your holy hill And to Your tabernacle.

So to answer your question personally I don't think that Father Herman is talking about a class of "holy men" who have reposed, and are distinct from the saints, in regard to their degree of perfection in holiness. I'm sure after reading the text that he is referring to righteous souls that have reposed that are not "officially" canonized. It might take some time.

The degree of perfection or holiness is not a determination made by us on an individual basis nor should it be, if God chooses to reveal his Saint's he will certainly do so through His Church. Gold is gold on any Icon would be how I look at it and Icons of Saint's come from within the Church. So such a practice would be understandable. Surely there are countless Saint's that are not on the calendar. The practice of asking the intercessions of righteous souls made perfect in faith that are not canonized is something that is unusual although it does happen. Recently this has happened with the new Soldier martyr Evgeny in Russia. You may read that the faithful "discerned" his canonization and the Church which is made up of the faithful and our Heirarchs collectively recognized that truth. Hence the connection continues as the relics of the new Soldier Martyr Evgeny in Russia are placed on Orthodox Altars.

Oh, send out Your light and Your truth! Let them lead me; Let them bring me to Your holy hill And to Your tabernacle.

The young Martyr Evgeny stood firm upon the Rock that Christ is the Son of God and layed down his very life for that belief (aka light and truth )and upon that Rock an Orthodox Church has been built in Chechnya. Righteousness having been baptized into Christ with the conviction that lead him to pour out his blood rather than to renounce Christ. Which leads me to wonder what does Saint Peter think of him?

"Thy martyr, Yevgeny, O Lord, in his sufferings has received an incorruptible crown from thee, our God, for having thy strength he has brought down his torturers, has defeated the powerless insolence of demons. Through his prayers save our souls."

http://www.monachos.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1989&highlight=Martyr+Evgeny

I hope this helps.

In Christ,

Matthew Panchisin

[Matthew Panchisin]

Dear Theophilus,

Just a quick follow up I'm not sure the class or degree way of looking at it can work out very well although I have not given it a great amount of thought, upon first reflection it seems that way to me though. I mentioned Saint Peter who denied Chirst thrice and then we have a young man who didn't deny him etc. I'm sure there would be many such examples.

In Christ,

Matthew Panchisin

[Ken McRae]

...to answer your question personally I don't think that Father Herman is talking about a class of "holy men" who have reposed, and are distinct from the saints, in regard to their degree of perfection in holiness. I'm sure after reading the text that he is referring to righteous souls that have reposed that are not "officially" canonized. It might take some time.

Dear Matthew,

Thanks again for your help. Your above explanation did not occur to me, to be honest, but I can see what you're saying and it makes "sense" to me. I guess I made a false assumption, due to my Catholic presuppositions, and perhaps in light of the post by Hieromonk Ambrose on the revelation of the Toll-Houses teaching also the assistance of Toll-House inhabitants by the application of the merits of the saints to them.

Also, I'm wondering if Fr. Herman's termionology appeared a little foreign to me, in terms of reserving the title of "saint" for only those canonized by the Church. If he had elected to call all holy persons by the title of saint, and had rather distinguished them alone by the terms "canonized" and "uncanonized", I might not have so easily misunderstood.

You see, in Catholicism, the souls in purgatory are referred to as "holy souls", and are said to have power with God to intercede for us, though still not yet perfected in holiness. Once again, though, your explanation has satisfied me. Thank you for taking the time and may the Lord richly bless you!

humbly,
Theophilus

[Matthew Panchisin]

Dear Theophilus,

Thanks for asking the questions I learned quite a bit by thinking about a response. I was afraid I was going to make mess so I'm glad it makes "sense" to you. I had to make sure it was making sense to me as well you know!

Have a blessed evening.

In Christ,

Matthew Panchisin

[M.C. Steenberg]

"I first heard about Elder Gabriel as a great righteous one of the 20th century, during my last seminary year at Holy Trinity Monastery, Jordanville, New York. His name was mentioned in connection with the phenomenon of praying to holy men for favors, because they hear just like the saints, and are granted power to intercede before God." (Abbot Herman, of St. Herman's Monastery, in the Preface to 'One of the Ancients: The Life and Struggles of Elder Gabriel, a Russian Man of Prayer', p. 12)

He says nothing more on the subject, that I have noticed. Perhaps I'm reading something into these words that is'nt really there, but is Father Herman talking about a class of "holy men" who have reposed, and are distinct from the saints, in regard to their degree of perfection in holiness?
I agree very much with Matthew P.'s comments in response to this. There is no classification between 'Holy Men' as a category distinct from 'The Saints'. We should remember that the saints, in terms of those on the diptychs of the churches, represent only the smallest fraction of the true communion of the saints, many of whom are unknown to all but God in this life. They are no less saints for not being on the calendar.

INXC Matthew

[M.C. Steenberg]

Dear all:

Just a note to say that I've moved the posts on the interpretation of scripture to their own thread: Tradition, Scripture, Experience > How to interpret scripture (http://www.monachos.net/forum/showthread.php?t=2646).

This will allow us to keep the present thread focused on any further discussion of 'toll houses' in particular.

INXC, Matthew

[Ken McRae]

I'm not sure the class or degree way of looking at it can work out very well ...

Dear Matthew,

I've been reflecting a little on the above words of yours, but must confess their meaning is unclear to me. If you can remember your train of thought at the time and would care to explain further, I'd be glad to give it some more consideration. However, to offer you something from an Orthodox source, though, that I think expresses the essence of my intended meaning, I offer these three quotes below, from the Philokalia:-

St. Makarios of Egypt:-

"Even if through sluggishness or debility of resolution we do not give ourselves once for all to our Maker, or if we do not strive to achieve the greatest and most perfect measure of virtue, none the less through an upright and undistorted will and a sound faith we may attain some degree of mercy." ('Prayer of the Heart' - Writings from the Philokalia, p. 180, >> http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0877738904/ref=pd_luc_mri/104-5513609-2744700?%5Fencoding=UTF8&m=A278H96QN966LH&v=glance&n=283155 <<)

Abba Moses of the Sketis Desert:-

"There are many similar ways of seeing and apprehending God, which grow in us according to our labour and to the degree of our purification." (ibid, p. 12)

St. Theodoros the Great Ascetic:-

"One has a longing for something only to the degree that one possesses knowledge of it." (ibid, p. 33-34)

[Matthew Panchisin]

Dear Theophilus,

Christ is Risen!

Having given it a bit more thought I don't think the degree or class way of looking at it can work out. It is a notion that I'm unfamilar with and something that I have never experienced in the Orthodox Church. It seems very disruptive or restrictive in many ways.

I just came home from a dear friends home who a year ago showed me a picture of a woman on his couch with him and his wife. I asked him who it was? He said " She is Holy" and showed me her name which is now on the calendar as "Blessed". She used to paint Icons and stopped by one day to see him and how he worked. He has her picture on the wall of his studio with all the Saints.

I see no problem with the quotes that you have provided, they are true however they do not represent different classes of Saints. I see nothing to suggest a categorization of individuals based on holiness which to me would be at odds with what is actually being said.


St. Makarios of Egypt:-

"Even if through sluggishness or debility of resolution we do not give ourselves once for all to our Maker, or if we do not strive to achieve the greatest and most perfect measure of virtue, none the less through an upright and undistorted will and a sound faith we may attain some degree of mercy." ('Prayer of the Heart' - Writings from the Philokalia, p. 180, >>


It seems to me that the above is a reference to fallen human nature and speaks of the priorities of an upright, strong will and faith.

I think it is important to remember those Saint's fought the evil one who is filthy and knows no limitations save what God allows them to suffer. They looked to God for some degree of mercy as they struggled. This is true for when they had times of an undistorted will and a sound faith they attained some degree of mercy. God being most merciful and loving does not let one perish even when the will is distorted and a sound faith is not always there. We can call to mind Saint Peter walking on the water and then becoming afraid in reference to St. Makarios of Egypt words. God's degree of mercy is not like ours. The Fathers tell us if we understand that we will begin to pray from our hearts in simple ways; thou art most merciful Lord God, and see. See what? See that we are not merciful even when we think we are and that God is always merciful even when we can't see His mercy. It's is not a matter of God being just i.e.. such a Saint has purified himself by God's grace so much so he is holy to such a corresponding degree.

It is true that "there are many similar ways of seeing and apprehending God, which grow in us according to our labour and to the degree of our purification."

If one wants to see the Glory of God we can look to Christ and His Church. If one wants to see the strong arm of the Lord God one needs only to look at the Church for deliverance, the mysteria, the Holy Priesthood and the intercessions of the Saints etc. Some may "look" and "see" more or less it depends on our labour and God's will and wisdom. Saint John Chrysostom saw much in the Priesthood through the eyes of faith. Saint Thomas is an Apostle who believed after placing his finger into Christ's wounds, he was obedient to what Christ asked him to do and saw much. Both are categorized as man both are Saint's thanks be to God. What would Saint Thomas say of the young Soldier Martyr Evgeny who believed without placing his finger into Christ's wounds?

When the Russian Orthodox Church glorified the New Martyrs and there are many they had not been looked upon as more purified than other Saints but rather as glorified members of the Church "it is adorned by their blood as by purple and fine linen the richest, most splendid and precious garments."

God gives different gifts to us and His Saints and to His Holy Orthodox Church.

In Christ,

Matthew Panchisin

[J. A. McIntyre]

Toll houses seems like such a strange teaching, I have a hard time wrapping my head around it.

[M.C. Steenberg]

Dear Theophilus, Matthew P. and others,

I seem to have gotten side-tracked from this quite interesting sub-discussion of the Toll Houses thread, on the possibility of 'categories' of saints. I thought Matthew's response to yours, Theophilus (above) was very good; and it certainly made the point I would wish to make - namely, that there is no perception of 'grades' or 'categories' of saints within the Christian tradition. There are types, yes (e.g. martyrs, in distinction to confessors, and so on), and there are even descriptions of certain individuals as holy to an exceptional degree. But that is precisely the language that seems necessary: degree, rather than rank or category -- and degree as based in a dynamic reality of sanctity as the fruit of the ascetic life. Sanctity must not be seen as a title granted to a person who meets a certain threshold of righteousness - and idea that could lend itself easily enough to multiple thresholds, multiple ranks, and thus multiple ranks or types of canonisation. Rather, it is the creative reality of ascetic engagement and encounter with God, not a thing quantifiable except inasmuch as one experiences in a holy person the holiness of God.

You provided a few quotations that you felt might edge toward a 'ranks' or 'categories' reading of canonisation. One of these was:


St. Makarios of Egypt:- "Even if through sluggishness or debility of resolution we do not give ourselves once for all to our Maker, or if we do not strive to achieve the greatest and most perfect measure of virtue, none the less through an upright and undistorted will and a sound faith we may attain some degree of mercy." ('Prayer of the Heart' - Writings from the Philokalia, p. 180)

I would read this precisely as indicating the full dynamic reality of sanctity, rather than any type of categorised levels. Through authentic ascetic endeavour, any person can attain sanctity in some degree. The calling of this idea rests in the fact that it is God who calls out to the person through that ascetical endeavour -- so the degree is ultimately limitless, bound only by our obedience or disobedience to receiving the grace offered through it.

You provided also the following:


Abba Moses of the Sketis Desert:- "There are many similar ways of seeing and apprehending God, which grow in us according to our labour and to the degree of our purification." (ibid, p. 12)

And:


St. Theodoros the Great Ascetic:-"One has a longing for something only to the degree that one possesses knowledge of it." (ibid, p. 33-34)

In each of these again, it seems the point being made is not that there are different ranks of sanctity to which one might attain, but that sanctity is a realm of existence, of being, in Christ that is available to all. The degree to which it is attained is not the product of a ranking, but of one's life in the embrace and encounter with Christ.

INXC, Matthew

[Kris]

I recently read Athos: travels on the Holy Mountain by Matthew Spencer, recounting his stay of a few weeks at the Grand Lavra in 1993. A novice there told him about the "toll houses," so apparently this idea is being taught on Mt. Athos, or at least it was at the Grand Lavra 10 years ago.

I remember Blessed Fr. Paisios the Athonite mentioning the Toll-Houses in his Epistles, so its definately something taught on Athos, by Greeks as well as Russians.

I do like Fr. Seraphim's book, The Soul After Death, but it focuses more on NDEs and not as much on toll-houses. I think Fr. Seraphim used St. Ignatius Brianchaninov's book (can't recall its name) as the main source of information about the Orthodox doctrine concerning life after death; so perhaps that's a better one to consult if one just wants to understand Toll-Houses.

Please pray for me, a sinner.

[Alex Michael Rusanen]

I remember Blessed Fr. Paisios the Athonite mentioning the Toll-Houses in his Epistles, so its definately something taught on Athos, by Greeks as well as Russians.

I do like Fr. Seraphim's book, The Soul After Death, but it focuses more on NDEs and not as much on toll-houses. I think Fr. Seraphim used St. Ignatius Brianchaninov's book (can't recall its name) as the main source of information about the Orthodox doctrine concerning life after death; so perhaps that's a better one to consult if one just wants to understand Toll-Houses.

Please pray for me, a sinner.

I found the following article by REV. DR. MICHAEL AZKOUL on the subject: http://www.new-ostrog.org/return_tollhouses.html

[Kosta]

The problem with the toll-houses is that even those that accept it do not agree on all the details. Some accept aspects of it, others hold to a different number of actual toll houses the soul visits, etc etc. Fr Ierotheos Vlachos seems to have come up with a synthesis of all the varying teachings on it, and his version seems to be the authoratative one. Fr. Thomas Hopko in an interview he gave on ancient faith radio disputed Archbishop Lazar's complete rejection of the toll-houses, but went on and interpreted it completely allegorically without many of the elements unique to the toll houses,(anoptherwords Fr Hopko's version would be rejected by the majority of those that hold to it).

[Cyprian (Humphrey)]

From my reading of Fr Seraphim Rose's work, his usage of the Toll Houses was allegorical. It's been a while, so I readily admit I may have to read it again. Yes, he did seem to focus more on NDE's and such.

But, Fr Seraphim never said they were literal. He used them as an example to encourage people to not live lax spiritual lives.

Now, as far as his detractors go, they are few and far between. Actually, there is only really one. Fr Michael Azkoul (is not him!) has only published one other work that isn't an "in-house" publication of Fr Seraphim's bitter opponent. So, Fr Michael hasn't found anyone to publish his anti-toll house material other than the one main detractor. Furthermore, when you actually read what Fr Michael has to say, he's far more circumspect in his critique.

At the height of their dispute, there was relatively little in the way of Orthodox material in English, so if you were Orthodox then, and didn't read Greek or Russian, or some other traditional Orthodox language, but only English, you read their materials, plain and simple.

Now, with more material being published in English, this dispute can be seen for what it is: a tempest in a teapot.

Fr Cyprian

[John Litster]

Greetings all..

I just bought "The Soul, the Body, and Death" by Fr. Seraphim Rose. It is a theological masterpiece! It's full of scriptural and patristic quotations.

The tollhouses seemed silly to me at first, until I realized what it meant. Here, in my opinion, are the implications of the tollhouses.

1) Sin is not merely some forensic infraction of a moral code. Sin is treason to the Kingdom of God. Sin gives the dark prince some sort of hold in our lives. At the tollhouses, the evil one will examine us to see if we have any debt to him.. anything of his in us.

2) Grace is also not something merely "imputed" or credited to our account. It must be appropriated by repentance, prayers, almsgivings. In the vision of Gregory concerning Theodora's ascent through the tollhouses, she is given a "bag of gold," spiritually representing prayers that St. Basil the New had said for her. I find this very similar to the spiritual vision in which John saw the prayers of the Saints as incense. Those prayers would allow Theodora to pass unhindered through the aerial realms. They were a direct manifestation of Christ's Grace. The grace of Christ is an ENABLING grace.. it enables us to "work out your salvation with fear and trembling."

3) The tollhouses also imply to me that while people may fall alone, no one is saved alone. We are saved in our participation in the saved community, the Church. Prayers, offerings, comemorations, and almsgivings for the dead directly appropriate the Grace of Christ on their behalf.

4) The tollhouses also imply that prior to the Second Coming, there is a chance for those now in Hades. Insomuch as they are willing to receive our help, those in hades may be lifted to paradise. Christ God, through His Cross, is indeed still drawing all men unto Himself! St. Gregory the Great is said to have noticed that the pagan Roman Emperor Trajan did a very good work on behalf of a poor widow... an act that was very much Christian in character. St. Gregory was moved by the All-Holy Spirit to weep and pray for this pagan. It is said that he baptized Trajan in his tears! Thanks to Saint Gregory, the Grace of Christ Jesus allowed Trajan to rise up from Hades and pass through the tollhouses to paradise! There are MANY other examples of these kinds of things in the lives of the saints.

5) The tollhouses take literally verses in scripture that refer to the "prince of the powers of the air," and "wickedness in high places."

Only the unrepentant will be hindered by these aerial spirits. Those who have manifested the grace of Christ will boldly confront the demons. It is said that the souls of small children pass them by and put the mighty princes to shame.

I love the doctrine of the tollhouses because of its catholicity within the Holy Church. Undisputably it is a part of Orthodox Tradition, and can be objectively traced from the third century onwards. From John Chrysostom to John of Damascus to TONS of others. Below are just a FEW of the people who have mentioned the tollhouses in their writings:

St. Eustratius the Great Martyr (4th century)
St. Niphon of Constantia in Cyprus (4th century)
St. Symeon the Fool for Christ (6th century)
St. John the Merciful (7th century)
St Symeon of the Wondrous Mountain (7th century)
St. Macarius the Great (4th century)
St. Columba (6th century)
St. Adamnan (8th century)
St. Boniface (8th century)
St. Basil the New (10th century)
the Soldier Taxiotes
St. John of the Ladder (6th century)

Those are my two cents on the aerial tollhouses.


Just curious - can you specify where in these respective writings the tollhouses are mentioned?

[Andreas Moran]

When my first wife died, Fr Zacharias said, 'her soul went straight up - no hindrance'. My wife's uncle Leonid died (in Moscow) this year on Bright Monday. The priest said what a blessing this was because such is the joy in heaven at Pascha and during Bright Week that the souls of those who depart at this time go up unhindered (which was just as well for uncle Leonid!).

[Olga]

When my first wife died, Fr Zacharias said, 'her soul went straight up - no hindrance'. My wife's uncle Leonid died (in Moscow) this year on Bright Monday. The priest said what a blessing this was because such is the joy in heaven at Pascha and during Bright Week that the souls of those who depart at this time go up unhindered (which was just as well for uncle Leonid!).

I have heard such comments quite often myself. An aunt of a very close friend of ours died on Easter Day itself. While she was such a dear old soul, who would have had no trouble getting to heaven under "normal" circumstances, and though her family knew her time was limited, as she had suffered a very serious stroke some months before, the telephone call which brought the news on such a day brought tears of sorrow and joy in equal measure to the extended family gathered at the Paschal table. Priest and layman alike on hearing the news said the same thing, without irreverence: "Lucky woman. She's gone to heaven with an express ticket."

[Alice]

"The priest said what a blessing this was because such is the joy in heaven at Pascha and during Bright Week that the souls of those who depart at this time go up unhindered (which was just as well for uncle Leonid!)."

What if the soul/person was an agnostic, unrepentent, or unbelieving?!?

[Paul Cowan]

"The priest said what a blessing this was because such is the joy in heaven at Pascha and during Bright Week that the souls of those who depart at this time go up unhindered (which was just as well for uncle Leonid!)."

What if the soul/person was an agnostic, unrepentent, or unbelieving?!?

What we believe applies to Orthodox Christians. It is up to God to decide the fate of all others. This is not to say they do not follow the Orthodox example; we just don't know. It is as many things are, a mystery.

[Andreas Moran]

I agree with Paul. Uncle Leonid (my mother-in-law's elder brother - the younger was killed fighting the Germans) was, as we say in Yorkshire, 'a bit of a lad' in his life. He had been artistic director of one of the main concert halls in Moscow and knew famous performers and top people in the government; these things brought their temptations. But he had fought bravely for his country against the fascists in WWII, and in the latter years of his life he did, I think, sort of return to the Orthodox Church. The only thing was that because he died when he did no priest could be found to give him absolution and Holy Communion.

As to others, I think of my first wife's mother, Muriel. She was a very mild and gentle person who suffered much in her life, most of all, when already over 80 years of age, from the death of her daughter. She was a believer but not a churchgoer, though had been Methodist. She had a vision of her daughter three days after her death, and this so comforted her that I believe it was true. I cannot believe in a God Who would not give Muriel blessed rest.

[Alice]

What we believe applies to Orthodox Christians. It is up to God to decide the fate of all others. This is not to say they do not follow the Orthodox example; we just don't know. It is as many things are, a mystery.

Dear Paul,

I am a cradle Orthodox so I was actually thinking of baptized Orthodox when I asked-- because, unfortunately, I know ALL too many who fit into the above three categories :(

Perhaps, our Lord in His great mercy, (and because only HE knows the true heart and souls of His children) choses only those souls to pass on druing Bright Week who He knows have never blasphemed the Holy Spirit by fitting into the above three categories.

In Christ,
Alice

[Alex Michael Rusanen]

I found the following in the article by Rev. Dr. Michael Azkoul:

"He is likewise correct to affirm that death puts a temporary end to the "person," inasmuch as the human personality is the union of soul and body. Only the Platonist identifies the individual with his soul, an act of contempt for the body 24. Incidentally, it is Bishop Gregory himself who here presents a clearly heretical concept of anthropology, because all the Fathers of the Church who wrote against Gnosticism, as well as St Gregory Palamas, make a point of stating categorically that the soul alone is not the person 25. "

Is this true, that we as Orthodox christians believe the human person (prosopo) to be a union between soul and body? If so, what does this imply; that the saints are not whole persons?

[Andrew]

I found the following in the article by Rev. Dr. Michael Azkoul:

"He is likewise correct to affirm that death puts a temporary end to the "person," inasmuch as the human personality is the union of soul and body. Only the Platonist identifies the individual with his soul, an act of contempt for the body 24. Incidentally, it is Bishop Gregory himself who here presents a clearly heretical concept of anthropology, because all the Fathers of the Church who wrote against Gnosticism, as well as St Gregory Palamas, make a point of stating categorically that the soul alone is not the person 25. "

Is this true, that we as Orthodox christians believe the human person (prosopo) to be a union between soul and body? If so, what does this imply; that the saints are not whole persons?

I think he goes too far with this. The human person contains soul and body, but under the unnatural condition of death man's soul is seperated from his body. This does not mean that the person ceases to exist - instead, he has entered the curse of death. But, Christ has emptied Hades and given light and rest to the souls to the righteous souls who await the Resurrection. The souls of those who live in a wrong manner undergo a foretaste of Hell. The prayers of the Church help both groups, and can even lift those out of Hell into the rest that the righteous live in. This is repeatedly taught by the Fathers of the Church. Fr. Michael Azkoul, HOCNA, Kalomiros, (and sometimes the writings of Fr. John Romanides after he suffered a stroke), Lazar Puhalo, and others take an exagerated stance on a lot of these issues and sort of form a rationalized pseudo-Philokalic criticism of traditional Orthodox "pietism."

[Euthymius]

Greetings all..

I just bought "The Soul, the Body, and Death" by Fr. Seraphim Rose. It is a theological masterpiece! It's full of scriptural and patristic quotations.

The tollhouses seemed silly to me at first, until I realized what it meant. Here, in my opinion, are the implications of the tollhouses.

1) Sin is not merely some forensic infraction of a moral code. Sin is treason to the Kingdom of God. Sin gives the dark prince some sort of hold in our lives. At the tollhouses, the evil one will examine us to see if we have any debt to him.. anything of his in us.

2) Grace is also not something merely "imputed" or credited to our account. It must be appropriated by repentance, prayers, almsgivings. In the vision of Gregory concerning Theodora's ascent through the tollhouses, she is given a "bag of gold," spiritually representing prayers that St. Basil the New had said for her. I find this very similar to the spiritual vision in which John saw the prayers of the Saints as incense. Those prayers would allow Theodora to pass unhindered through the aerial realms. They were a direct manifestation of Christ's Grace. The grace of Christ is an ENABLING grace.. it enables us to "work out your salvation with fear and trembling."

3) The tollhouses also imply to me that while people may fall alone, no one is saved alone. We are saved in our participation in the saved community, the Church. Prayers, offerings, comemorations, and almsgivings for the dead directly appropriate the Grace of Christ on their behalf.

4) The tollhouses also imply that prior to the Second Coming, there is a chance for those now in Hades. Insomuch as they are willing to receive our help, those in hades may be lifted to paradise. Christ God, through His Cross, is indeed still drawing all men unto Himself! St. Gregory the Great is said to have noticed that the pagan Roman Emperor Trajan did a very good work on behalf of a poor widow... an act that was very much Christian in character. St. Gregory was moved by the All-Holy Spirit to weep and pray for this pagan. It is said that he baptized Trajan in his tears! Thanks to Saint Gregory, the Grace of Christ Jesus allowed Trajan to rise up from Hades and pass through the tollhouses to paradise! There are MANY other examples of these kinds of things in the lives of the saints.

5) The tollhouses take literally verses in scripture that refer to the "prince of the powers of the air," and "wickedness in high places."

Only the unrepentant will be hindered by these aerial spirits. Those who have manifested the grace of Christ will boldly confront the demons. It is said that the souls of small children pass them by and put the mighty princes to shame.

I love the doctrine of the tollhouses because of its catholicity within the Holy Church. Undisputably it is a part of Orthodox Tradition, and can be objectively traced from the third century onwards. From John Chrysostom to John of Damascus to TONS of others. Below are just a FEW of the people who have mentioned the tollhouses in their writings:

St. Eustratius the Great Martyr (4th century)
St. Niphon of Constantia in Cyprus (4th century)
St. Symeon the Fool for Christ (6th century)
St. John the Merciful (7th century)
St Symeon of the Wondrous Mountain (7th century)
St. Macarius the Great (4th century)
St. Columba (6th century)
St. Adamnan (8th century)
St. Boniface (8th century)
St. Basil the New (10th century)
the Soldier Taxiotes
St. John of the Ladder (6th century)

Those are my two cents on the aerial tollhouses.

No, Father Seraphim was wrong on this teaching. He used bad translations, didn't funish citations and suppressed material which millitates against his theory. Michael Azkoul has a Ph.D. in patristics from Oxford. He has written a refutation of Father Seraphim's book called "THE TOLL HOUSE MYTH." Archbishop Lazare Puhalo has also written extensively against it.

God is not sadistic. The idea that we have to endure a horrible life full of struggles, only to face twenty stations at death where we must ascend and make it to heaven if we are good enough, and where we are left at the mercy of the demons, is ludicrous. I feel sorry for people who have such a dark perception of God. I think some people need to believe in the toll houses because it suits their dark personalities. They give the devil too much credit.

[Father David Moser]

No, Father Seraphim was wrong on this teaching. He used bad translations, didn't funish citations and suppressed material which millitates against his theory. Michael Azkoul has a Ph.D. in patristics from Oxford. He has written a refutation of Father Seraphim's book called "THE TOLL HOUSE MYTH." Archbishop Lazare Puhalo has also written extensively against it.

Euthymius,

Let me suggest, since you are a new member of our community, that you go back and read the early posts in this thread. There are many, including patristic scholars who are the equal if not superior to Fr Michael, and great men of prayer and full of spiritual experience who do not agree with Fr Michael's position.

I know (or knew) both Lev Puhalo (aka Archbishop Lazar) and Fr Michael Azkoul. I think that neither one is quite as authoritative as you would seem to make them out. They both went into schismatic groups after leaving the Russian Church (although Puhalo has now re-emerged as a retired Archbishop in the OCA, despite the fact that as a deacon he was defrocked).

The issue of the tollhouses is much more complex than whether or not they are "real" or "heretical" so I suggest that you look more closely at the entire body of writing, not just a couple of books which agree with you. (I have, btw, read both the writings of Fr Michael and Puhalo and neither one seems to be able to compare with those from the likes of Protopriest Michael Pomazansky for example).

Fr David Moser

[Nicolaj]

How true this is what you bring forth Father.

The toll houses are not to discuss and not to frighten us, but to make us aware of life after death and that we should prepare. This isn't going to be easy but like the virgins awaiting the bridegroom we should prepare in the best way we can.

Christos voskrese! Nicolaj

[Kseniya M.]

My thoughts were prompted on this by a new thread, but I thought I'd better reply to an old one rather than keep the new one going.

The toll houses scare the daylights out of me. I'm a timid soul that has had to endure much use and abuse in my life, and the idea that I would suddenly, upon dying, become bold in the face of demons trying to examine me is outrageous at best. I'm unsure of myself at the best of times, and the demons are experts at getting to us and playing on our fears. That they'd have free rein to terrify me and attempt to make me despair of God's mercy after death is a horrifying idea, not least because I can see myself easily becoming convinced by a clever demon that I belonged in hell.

I really, really don't want to believe that the toll houses exist. It just seems so unfair.

-Kseniya

[Paul Cowan]

If the toll house route is true, we will have our Gaurdian Angel escorting us who is our protector from baptism and will refute all the allegations of the demons. Their minds are perfect where ours are not. We will need to let them fight for us. And of course we have recourse through the Theotokos as well.

Best to remember we have this life to perfect ourselves and we need to live as God would have us and partake of the sacraments especially confession. As the Holy elder says; Keep your mind in hell and despair not.

Paul

[Kseniya M.]

Best to remember we have this life to perfect ourselves and we need to live as God would have us and partake of the sacraments especially confession. As the Holy elder says; Keep your mind in hell and despair not.

Yes, but. We don't know when our lives will end. I could walk out my front door and get hit by a runaway truck and BLAM it's over when I haven't had enough time to "perfect" myself. I'm nowhere near it -- I do my best but man it's slow slogging to overcome my faults and sinfulness -- this stuff is terrifying.

-Kseniya

[Paul Cowan]

this stuff is terrifying.

-Kseniya

As well it should be. This is not just a life long struggle. This is an eternal outcome. AND fear is one thing satan relies on to make us despondant and shakey. Talk to your priest. None of us get to heaven except by the grace and mercy of God anyway. We can't earn our way in. We run the race best we can and we pray and we partake of the sacraments. We are only human. That is a benefit and a detriment at the time of judgement.

I can't see myself getting past the first toll house, (pride?) let alone making it past all 10 or is it 12? As the Cub Scout motto says: Do your best. Beyond that it only by the grace of God.

Paul

[M.C. Steenberg]

Dear friends,

There is so much written amiss about this whole concept. But those who have expounded the patristic writings that discuss this, have always taken pains to point out that the terms and visions do not describe a scientific 'plan' for the experience of the soul after death; rather, they describe the true reality of a soul tempted by the demons and guarded by the angels. This is not radically different from what the soul (and body) undergoes in this lifetime: it is the extension of this time of trial, temptation, strengthening, purification, etc. That the demons try the soul on its departure from the body is common teaching in the patristic tradition.

It is likely the vocbaulary of 'toll houses' that causes such difficulty. A shame we have not a better, more adequate term, which does not connote the ideas of 'paying a fare', and 'getting by the guard' that this term does (particularly in English). But the wholesale rejection against what is a basic patristic vision of the soul after death, on grounds of discomfort over the term, is a real problem.

INXC, Fr Dcn Matthew

[Andreas Moran]

Do your best.

I'm sure I don't.


It just seems so unfair.

It may be fairer than we think. Icons show the Archangel Michael with scales weighing the good and the bad as though written on scrolls, and the little single scroll of good weighs more and brings that side of the scales down despite the several scrolls of bad on the other side.

It is said we have Archangel Michael to help us as well as our guardian angel.

Late one evening recently, a cat outside the window startled me with a hellish-sounding squeal. As my blood ran cold for a moment, I though, 'if the sound of a cat has this effect, how will I react to the screaming of the demons?' I have heard it said in Russia that one reason to pray the Jesus Prayer constantly is because when the soul leaves the body, it will be so startled and afraid, it will hardly know how to pray but if the person has said the Jesus Prayer always, the soul will be able to pray for mercy.

[Kseniya M.]

they describe the true reality of a soul tempted by the demons and guarded by the angels. This is not radically different from what the soul (and body) undergoes in this lifetime: it is the extension of this time of trial, temptation, strengthening, purification, etc. That the demons try the soul on its departure from the body is common teaching in the patristic tradition.

It is different, though, in that during this life the vast majority of us are shielded from direct perception of the demons. It can't be the same thing to be beset, as most of us are, by evil thoughts (which I was taught is the most common way demons interact with ordinary people) as it is to be face to face with demons in all their malice and ugliness and evil. I'm quite sure that, torn from my body by death and able to see them clearly, I will find them quite terrifying.

-Kseniya

[Fr Raphael Vereshack]

Kseniya M. wrote:


The toll houses scare the daylights out of me. I'm a timid soul that has had to endure much use and abuse in my life, and the idea that I would suddenly, upon dying, become bold in the face of demons trying to examine me is outrageous at best. I'm unsure of myself at the best of times, and the demons are experts at getting to us and playing on our fears. That they'd have free rein to terrify me and attempt to make me despair of God's mercy after death is a horrifying idea, not least because I can see myself easily becoming convinced by a clever demon that I belonged in hell.

I really, really don't want to believe that the toll houses exist. It just seems so unfair.

But that's the hypothetical 'now' you're talking about. Then if we see more clearly most everything will look very different from now.

Somewhat along these lines, recently I was reading in one of the Fathers where he describes our burial in the earth as being covered with a beautiful blanket. Such a benign view of what we commonly see with so much dread & finality. But really- his description is the more authentic and real view.

In the Risen Christ- Fr Raphael

[Andrew D. Morrell]

Father bless!

Would you mind sharing which Father expressed that lovely and encouraging thought?

In Christ,
Andrew


Kseniya M. wrote:
Somewhat along these lines, recently I was reading in one of the Fathers where he describes our burial in the earth as being covered with a beautiful blanket. Such a benign view of what we commonly see with so much dread & finality. But really- his description is the more authentic and real view.

In the Risen Christ- Fr Raphael

[Andrew D. Morrell]

Father bless!

Your comment is so on point. When, coming into the Church, I was eventually introduced to the concept of "toll houses", getting my head wrapped around it was hindered both by my feelings and by the many overly descriptive and poetic explanations given. A succinct description/explanation would have been welcome.

<SMILE> But is there anything in Orthodoxy that is described or discussed in just a few words?

In Christ,
Andrew


Dear friends,

There is so much written amiss about this whole concept. But those who have expounded the patristic writings that discuss this, have always taken pains to point out that the terms and visions do not describe a scientific 'plan' for the experience of the soul after death; rather, they describe the true reality of a soul tempted by the demons and guarded by the angels. This is not radically different from what the soul (and body) undergoes in this lifetime: it is the extension of this time of trial, temptation, strengthening, purification, etc. That the demons try the soul on its departure from the body is common teaching in the patristic tradition.

It is likely the vocbaulary of 'toll houses' that causes such difficulty. A shame we have not a better, more adequate term, which does not connote the ideas of 'paying a fare', and 'getting by the guard' that this term does (particularly in English). But the wholesale rejection against what is a basic patristic vision of the soul after death, on grounds of discomfort over the term, is a real problem.

INXC, Fr Dcn Matthew

[Paul Cowan]

<SMILE> But is there anything in Orthodoxy that is described or discussed in just a few words?

In Christ,
Andrew


No.

[Nina]

Why, yes!

Christ is Risen!

[Fr Raphael Vereshack]

Father bless!

Would you mind sharing which Father expressed that lovely and encouraging thought?

In Christ,
Andrew

I think it may have been in one of St John Chrysostom's Homilies on the Gospel of St John. But which one I can't remember.

In the Risen Christ- Fr Raphael

[Andreas Moran]

I had written on my late first wife's headstone, 'Earth hath not covered our beloved, but heaven hath received her'. It is adapted from a letter of condolence of St Basil the Great.

[Sean]

Sorry to interject here, but I was wondering if someone could explain to me where this "third" class or group of souls dwells, if not in heaven with the saints, or in hell with the sinners. Are they "eternally" stuck in the Toll-Houses? If they are not in the Toll-Houses, then where are they? Will they, or can they ever achieve perfection in holiness, like the saints, and ascend fully into heaven? Do our prayers on earth work toward their release from the Toll-Houses and final ascent into heaven? And if our prayers are effectual with God, on their behalf, then how about our penances? Will God receive penances performed by us and offered to Him for their sakes? Any comments would be appreciated. Thanks!

I'm sorry about bringing up an old thread but I read this thread and am still stuck at what Ken said. I read a version of St. Theodora's journey and the way the account was worded, it made it seem like if a soul can't "pay up" at the toll house, the demons would take him and punish him as much as they could and through intercession prayers, repentance, etc., the soul would eventually be saved. And after reading different versions of St. Theodora, I'm not quite sure what the people that subscribe to the toll house concept believe. The three different versions I have been led to believe is that (a): if an Orthodox Christian can't pay up at a toll house, demons will take him into hell where he has no chance of being saved. Or (b): If an Orthodox Christian can't pay up, demons take him somewhere and punish him but he will eventually be saved. Or (c): If an Orthodox Christian can't pay up, demons will take and punish him and he may or may not be saved, depending on the sins he committed, intercession prayers, repentance, etc. Am I correct in thinking that for those Orthodox who believe in the toll house concept, that some believe in (a), others believe in (b), and others believe in (c)?

[Father David Moser]

I'm sorry about bringing up an old thread but I read this thread and am still stuck at what Ken said. I read a version of St. Theodora's journey and the way the account was worded, it made it seem like if a soul can't "pay up" at the toll house, the demons would take him and punish him as much as they could and through intercession prayers, repentance, etc., the soul would eventually be saved....

The problem with this is that the tollhouses are not and were never meant to be a description of reality. The vision of the tollhouses is a vision which is, in a sense, a verbal icon of the particular judgment that we all will experience when we die. It is not meant to be taken literally. If you try to interpret it literally you will end up somewhere far away from Orthodoxy (probably in Roman Catholic purgatory).

The reality is that when we die we will each face a particular (not final) judgment - the judge is God, not the demons. The demons do however attempt to accuse us before God. The subject of the judgment is our earthly life and the object of the judgment is where and how we will await the resurrection. The tollhouses are one of many attempts (however a popular and useful attempt) to explain the particulars of that reality. However, the particulars of the life beyond the grave are completely uncomprehendable to our fallen intellect and so only vague and imperfect images that we can comprehend are possible.

Of the three scenarios that you posit above, none are correct because all assume that the person is being punished. In fact it is not punishment that we talk about here, but rather the natural consequence of our own actions. If you are diabetic, is your blood sugar issue a "punishment"? If you are born blind and because of your blindness you walk into a wall and are injured - are your injuries a punishment? We are "born sinful" and thus the consequences of our sins are not punishments, but rather the natural outcome of our sins - and we experience these somehow (with some intensity not experienced in this life it would seem) in the life after death. In this life we have the chance to be cured of our infirmity - and to the extent that we are cured we escape the consequences of our illness, but not everyone is cured all the same and so some suffer more than others. This is not punishment - it is however an occasion for compassion and prayer.

Fr David Moser

[Sean]

The problem with this is that the tollhouses are not and were never meant to be a description of reality. The vision of the tollhouses is a vision which is, in a sense, a verbal icon of the particular judgment that we all will experience when we die. It is not meant to be taken literally. If you try to interpret it literally you will end up somewhere far away from Orthodoxy (probably in Roman Catholic purgatory).

The reality is that when we die we will each face a particular (not final) judgment - the judge is God, not the demons. The demons do however attempt to accuse us before God. The subject of the judgment is our earthly life and the object of the judgment is where and how we will await the resurrection. The tollhouses are one of many attempts (however a popular and useful attempt) to explain the particulars of that reality. However, the particulars of the life beyond the grave are completely uncomprehendable to our fallen intellect and so only vague and imperfect images that we can comprehend are possible.

Of the three scenarios that you posit above, none are correct because all assume that the person is being punished. In fact it is not punishment that we talk about here, but rather the natural consequence of our own actions. If you are diabetic, is your blood sugar issue a "punishment"? If you are born blind and because of your blindness you walk into a wall and are injured - are your injuries a punishment? We are "born sinful" and thus the consequences of our sins are not punishments, but rather the natural outcome of our sins - and we experience these somehow (with some intensity not experienced in this life it would seem) in the life after death. In this life we have the chance to be cured of our infirmity - and to the extent that we are cured we escape the consequences of our illness, but not everyone is cured all the same and so some suffer more than others. This is not punishment - it is however an occasion for compassion and prayer.

Fr David Moser
Okay it makes more sense now. Thank you