Must we believe in the Toll Houses?

  • Thread starter Thread starter searchingheart
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Rufinus said:
One exception from Antiochian school was John Chrysostome. And even his works were mostly forgotten. Nobody would even knew if he had existed if it weren`t for liturgy ascribed to him.
Click to expand...
Hmmmm methinks that you might be missing the forest for the trees… 😉

The Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom is the heartbeat of the Eastern Orthodox Church.

I would not say we would know nothing of him even if he hadn’t given us the Liturgy, for we have volumes of his homilies, letters, exhortations, etc. He is a Holy and Godbearing Father of the Church and both Catholic and Orthodox claim him as their own, and use him as a patristic authority.

Also re: Alexandria vs. Antioch:

“However, after the Council of Chalcedon (451), the Antiochian school became the sole theological school within Eastern and Western Christianity, where the Far-Eastern Churches adopted the Alexandrian School of Theology.”–Wikipedia, School of Antioch

This proves that the Antiochian School was not overwhelmingly heretical.
 
Rufinus said:
If you recall in church history Antiochian school was rejected as heretical in the East in favor of Alexandrian school. One exception from Antiochian school was John Chrysostome. And even his works were mostly forgotten. Nobody would even knew if he had existed if it weren`t for liturgy ascribed to him.
Click to expand...
I’m not so sure this is true. The Antiochan school as whole was not rejected but only the Nestorian trends in the school. I think it’s safe to say that most of the church looked upon the Alexandrian school with suspicion for most of church history due to their allegorical emphasis in interpretation of scriptures where most felt more inclined to the more literal interpretation of scripture.

Evidence again is the doctrine of hypostatic union where the Alexandrian school preferred to speak of one nature where as the church spoke of two natures providing an orthodox interpretation of Antiochan wording which tended to be Nestorian due to Theodore of Mopsuestia influencing the Antiochan school.
 
Last edited:
Rufinus said:
If you recall in church history Antiochian school was rejected as heretical in the East in favor of Alexandrian school.
Click to expand...
I don’t recall either of the schools being condemned as heretic, but only extremists from those school being condemned. Didn’t extremists in the Alexandrian school tend toward a purely allegorical interpretation of Scripture (ignoring the historical), whereas extremists in the Antiochian tended toward a purely historical interpretation (ignoring the spiritual)? Balance was eventually found and the Church recognized the need for both schools of thought.
 
It used to bother me. Now I think this phenomenon introduces soteriologicall mess.
 
Alexander of Alexandria accused Aerius for repeating heresy of Lucian, one of founders of Antiochian school. Aerius calls his friends collucianistes. After 4th century only Basil of Seleucia and Genadius of Constantinople are from Antiochian school.
 
Rufinus said:
It used to bother me.
Now I think this phenomenon introduces soteriologicall mess.
Click to expand...
Well, it does address soteriological issues…

Do you acknowledge that there even IS, say, a demon of fornication? Or a demon of suicide? Or a demon of homocide? etc etc?

Do you know that devil means accuser - dia-bollo? That you will be accused after you die? And sometimes before? Whether justified or not? As was Christ?

geo
 
Last edited:
George720 said:
Probably true…
Click to expand...
I would modify this to say “possibly true…”

The Toll House theory, from my understanding, is based on visions from the Desert Fathers. When approaching such visions I think there are two things that are important to keep in mind:

First - the Desert Fathers themselves (along with other Eastern Christian mystics) were always highly skeptical of visions and locutions. A story comes to mind about one of the Fathers (can’t remember which). The devil appeared to him in the form of Christ and said, “I am Jesus.” The Father simply replied something to the effect, “I don’t want to see you here, but in eternal life.” The devil then fled because of the Father’s humility. This, from my reading of the Fathers, is the approach that they had to visions in general.

Secondly - in terms of theologoumenon - there have similarly been visions of purgatory from mystics of the West. I would ask, is it possible that God grants these visions according to the religious and cultural understanding of the visionaries in order to convey some essential teaching, but in the “trappings” of something non-essential?

The Toll House theory, I think, illustrates very well the fact that at our particular judgment the Calumniator (my favorite name for the devil from the Desert Fathers) will stand with us before the throne of Christ and accuse us of our sins. Similarly, the visions of purgatory as fire illustrate that any purgation that takes place after death is a purgation in the fire of God’s intense love for us.

Having not experienced death and judgment first-hand, however, I completely recognize that I could be wrong, and that what we’re speaking of is complete mystery… possibly best left to silent meditation.
 
The school of Antioch was eventually associated with the theology of the East Syriacs (The St Thomas Chirstians and the Church of the East) although we eventually moved our school to Nisbis. Something that frustruates is the fact that people still call us heretics. We believe (or at least in the past) that Jesus had 2 distinct natures (kyena) that united into 1 (parsapon/hypostatic union.) The qnoma is what complicates. The Qnoma is more like essence. For example, All if us have the same nature, human. We all have different esences however. The East Syriac theologians like Mar Theodre, Mar Disdore, and Mar Babbai all stated that qnome are not hypostatic unions. That would be incorrect. The Qnome are merely essences, nothing else
 
Elvis_George said:
We believe (or at least in the past) that Jesus had 2 distinct natures (kyena) that united into 1 (parsapon/hypostatic union.)
Click to expand...
Therein is the rub, you see -
The Prosopon vs the Hypostasis…
The Prosopon is the face or person,
and
The Hypostasis is the foundation or person…

Ontologically, the Person is the Hypostasis, or Foundation of all else…
Including the Divine Ousia… (Essence)
This is the basis for self-responsibility in fallen creation…
And the Prosopon is the manifestation of the Divine Hypostasis…
Upon which no man can behold the Face of God and live…

Resolution of these issues runs silent and deep…

geo
 
Last edited:
Herein lies the additional rub - the approach to theology found in the Byzantine East and Latin West which is heavily dependent on Greek philosophical concepts, vs. the approach of the Syriac East which is traditionally highly skeptical of the role and value of Greek philosophical concepts in explaining infinite mystery.

The truth is, we need a healthy understanding of these concepts… as well as a healthy (and humble) understanding of their limits. 😉
 
Is the concept of “Toll houses” against the teachings of the Catholic Church?
 
Elvis_George said:
Is the concept of “Toll houses” against the teachings of the Catholic Church?
Click to expand...
I don’t think it is. It is mostly allegorial in character if I understand it correctly, and it is a pious opinion that may or may not be held by faithful. Maybe in time it will be recognized as either heretical or dogmatical, but as of now that does not seem to be the case.
 
Personally, I think the idea is neat can be considered the Individual Judgment we will all face after our demise
 
Elvis_George said:
Personally, I think the idea is neat can be considered the Individual Judgment we will all face after our demise
Click to expand...
I don’t dislike the idea either. I think it resembles Latin Doctrine of Purgatory and that it is actually Patristic in essence. Yet, if someone prefers not to see it that way I got no problem with that either.
 
I am very confused as to why and how the Toll Houses are not the Purgatory …. First our theologians say “how do the Catholics know of the Purgatory? Nobody came back from the dead! It’s impossible.” Then we are taught of the Toll Houses but wait! these are not the Purgatory…
So I am somewhat confused as to what I am supposed to believe in if it is a dogma we must hold.
Sometimes I feel like Eastern Orthodoxy forces out contradictions just to make sure that no gewalt is being used.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top