So wrote an article called “What is Heathenism Missing?” over at polytheist.com. I’ve glanced through it a few times, wanting to write a response/breakdown of it. I haven’t though, because while I think he’s got some good points, I think there’s a few obvious things he’s missing which I’ve touched on in the past (and will probably touch on here), and…he gives me a run for dense, verbose prose. I would literally have to take his paragraphs apart, and he writes more than I do in a post.
Regular readers will realize how much that is.
Instead, I’m going to pull some key points here and there that I want to address. I’m also going to be referencing my own stuff, and some stuff that’s come about because of it. Going into this article, I’ve been dealing with rather weaksauce insult from a guy named Höskuld Sigurdsson in my post “And He Says to Me: Don’t Call Me Brother!” XD” which you all can go read at your leisure. But it does perfectly illustrate what that post was about.
But to start this off, I’m going to give you all a little story.
It was an Allthing.
It was not the first Allthing, nor would it be the last. But in many ways, it was the last for them. Christianity had come to their lands, and with it, Christian supremacy by blood, and sword, and serpent. Iceland was the last hope, the last hold out, and the vote was being cast.
“They will keep the faith,” Skadi said, leaning against her bow. “We are their kin, their family, their ancestors. They will not abandon us. The most faithful came here to be the faithful.”
Odin said nothing, merely resting his spear across his shoulders. His blue hat hid his eye. The Allfather could see. So could Tyr, God of Law. The vote was cast. In private, the old gods could be worshiped, but publicly the nation was to be Christian.
Skadi spat in rage. The rest were silent, sorrowful. They mounted their horses and rode away.
This story is based on accounts from the legendary Thing, where it was said witnesses witnessed the Gods ride away from Iceland after they converted their nation to Christianity.
What is missing from Heathenism?
The Gods.
In a real way, I think this is why so many branches of Heathenism do not have a very Theistic focus. I think this is also why most European Heathens are very anti-theistic and make fun of American Theistic Heathens. Ancient Heathens, and this is something none of us really like to talk about…voted to Gods to go away. We can wrap it up in “Christian violence” and “persecution” and for some areas that’s true. But at the end of the day, our ancestors voted to reject the Gods. Freely, and of their own will. They could have fought, they could have died, but in the end…they rejected the Gods.
And so…the Gods reject most Heathens. This is why you have so many talking about how offerings shouldn’t be offered to freely, how it doesn’t matter how much or little you give the Gods won’t give more in turn. This is why so many heathens seem to fail to uphold our own heathen values that we preach.
Look, I’m not going to get any friends by saying this. Admitting this is something No Heathen Does. But it’s something we have to acknowledge before we go on to talk about what else Heathenism is Missing.
Hela Bless
Son of Hel 
I would disagree with you on a point of history. While it is true that in Iceland the conversion to public Christianity was done by a vote, everywhere else I can think of the process was imposed by force from above, or through missionaries (who often had the support of the rulers). It’s all too easy to become “Iceland-centric”, but recall that there were plenty of Heathens after the year 1,000. This might also be interesting: http://jonupsalsgarden.blogspot.com/2013/01/timeline-of-christianization.html
LikeLike
Thanks for the timeline.
I know everywhere/when up until then was by force (especially Norway). Which I glossed over, but is relevant to my point about the vote. Everyone fought, everyone tried, right up to Iceland. Iceland, one get’s the impression, was settled by the most faithful, the ones who refused to give up the old Gods. And yet when the fight came…they folded. Sure, the gods were worshiped after that, for a time, but it was a private, secret thing…not a public faith.
Which is an attitude I still see in most Heathenism. The Gods are worshiped, (McNallen and the AFA are pretty vocal about them) but even with the more vocal, the vast majority treat the relationships we have with the gods (or at least give the impression) as a “private” thing, but not a public one. You see it more in the European or Lore heavy heathens, who mock and laugh at anyone with a very public “devotional” relationship with the gods. I think it’s an attitude, possibly subconsciously, carried over from the “vote.” At least…that’s a theory I have.
I think it’s a bit like the battle of Helm’s Deep, except if at the end instead of riding out to fight the Orcs, they had just put down their swords. Yes, the fight had been epic, long, and honorable…but the finish was a surrender. I think while the Gods are willing to forgive our new generation of Heathenism for this surrender, it is still a taste in their mouths and a hesitation in their minds given how so many modern Heathens have started to act in the last several years (which is when this outer exploration seems to have really started).
LikeLike
But that’s exactly my point. Iceland converted with a vote in the 9th century, but long after that, there were people in Scandinavia publicly worshiping the Gods, and who were only finally subjugated by force. Hel, there were crusades against Heathens in Sweden as late as the twelfth century, and Saint Birgitta was complaining about Swedes worshiping the “Tomten Gods” in their homes well into the fourteenth century.
That said, I would imagine that someone who chooses to convert because a missionary convinces them to would be even worse than someone who was just trying to follow the law as voted by the Althing.
But I also note your notion about contemporary Heathens having private, as opposed to public, relationships with the Gods. This is actually central to my own theory of why a lot of us who are “hard polytheists” have issues with those who describe themselves as “devotional polytheists”. The perception that devotional polytheists believe that, without an intense, one-on-one personal relationship with one or more deities, one doesn’t really believe in them, or worship them “correctly”, or is somehow otherwise deficient.
LikeLike
You’re theory has some merrit about the hard vs devotional. I haven’t experienced it, but I guess I can see where you’re coming from.
I think the issue here personally is that you have an “insider’s” point of view and I have an “outsider’s” point of view. We’re both heathens, but it’s like you live in the city, you have a kindred, and a net work, and you’re surrounded by heathens who all have a certain education about heathenism. Where as I’m a country heathen, living in the wild and seeing my own civilization (cause I do consider myself as much a heathen as you) largely from the outside. Not to say I know less about it, just that I know different things about it. You see and know things about it I never have, and I see and know things about it you never have. Which is a good thing, but it can leave issues to grow.
In which case I guess a lot of “hards” are more “city” folks where as I freely admit that most of us devotionals are “country” folks. We live out in the hedge, without a lot of our fellow heathens, so we develop relationships very closely with certain gods relevant to our “geography.” And then we come to the city and see even the hard polytheists who are not less faithful, but perhaps less…public, about it. And of course, we all see the massive numbers of heathens who are practically atheistic and even anti-god.
So the impressions you have and what I have are different. Doesn’t make either of them wrong. Just…makes us who we are.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I don’t understand the distinction between ‘hard’ polytheist and ‘devotional’ polytheist here. From my understanding a hard polytheist is one who knows the gods are individual entities with agency of their own, whereas a devotional polytheist is, by definition, a hard polytheist who happens to have an intense devotional relationship with a god(s).
Is there a distinction being made that I have missed? I know some of the more…devout of the devotional types flog the ‘DEVOTION IS THE END ALL BE ALL” part of things, but nearly every other (as I am one myself) devotional polytheist I’ve met IRL has been of the same opinion as myself – devotional relationships are but one of a myriad ways to interact with the Gods, but not always correct for everyone.
That actually ties in with another point:
One of the issues *I* see in Heathenry is that the loudest voices are the ones insisting that they’re right and EVERYONE needs to do it that way – be it the loud devout folks or the folkish types.
Meanwhile, when other traditions have this issue…they either split off and form another group (See:The Protestant Reformation, or “Hey we disagree with some things so we’re leaving”, or, every single church in my area, of which there are dozens, all slightly different from the rest) or the umbrella itself makes room for variations. I was raised Roman Catholic, which i often use as a comparison to paganism as…well, they’re not all that far off except for the monotheism thing. There are a dozen ways to be Roman Catholic, from casually religious (the lay folks) to devout followers. Many of my Aunts and my great grandmother, for example, had personal devotional relationships with various Saints. And their priests would help them perform rituals and blessings. There are the exceptionally devout laypeople – sanctified virgins, mystics, etc. Various types of Clergy fulfilling different needs.
They have a structure to work within (now. 2000 years ago….) and we keep burning down the structure before it gets built because everyone wants to be ‘right’.
LikeLike
I have to agree with the devotional polytheists from the perspective of: why? Why bother if you don’t believe in the Gods? Why? If you like the culture, then become a Swede-o-phile, or a Dane-o-phile, or do Viking reconstruction or something else like that. Why become a heathen?
Tier One Viking is hosting a weekly podcast from some guy who freely admits he is atheist but he’s also a new heathen so he’s talking about what you should do to become a heathen. Dude please. You’re not heathen, you’re a culture hound.
Which is not to say that agnosticism isn’t a legitimate part of religion, it very often is a gateway by which people of all faiths become theist. By entering into a formal relationship via religious practices people open themselves to actual personal experience with Deity/ies. But if you are atheist you will never acknowledge ANYTHING that may be from the Gods. You won’t even recognize it without an up close and personal visitation, and even that is suspect.
Dear Spouse, who is an agnostic, simply doesn’t “get” why I give the offerings I do. I have to explain, over and over, that this is a reciprocal relationship. If I give “token” offerings (which to me are stingy) then I should only expect “token” help in return if I ever need it. Plus, they’re devotional offerings. They’re not given with the expectation of reward, they’re given to build relationship. If I want to make or keep a friend I don’t give them a token gift, I give them good stuff. Same for the Gods. But, having had a few up close and personal visitations, there is not and never will be again any question of whether they’re real or not for me. Until DH has the same experience this will continue to be a source of minor conflict for us.
LikeLike