So I was checking my emails and saw Volmarr had made a post about how “reconstructionism” was “roleplay” and decided to check it out. These are my thoughts.

Why Strict Reconstructionist Norse Paganism Is Roleplay—Not a Living Spiritual Practice for Most

In the world of Norse Paganism, there’s a growing tension between two very different approaches: strict reconstructionism and modern spiritual adoption. At first glance, both claim to honor the gods and revive ancient ways—but scratch the surface, and their core intentions begin to sharply diverge.

I’ve been a Heathen for half my life and going on twenty years now and I can tell you…this isn’t a growing tension. It’s existed since I’ve been around. Hel, pretty sure it existed long before I got here. One thing I can say though is that based on this opening statement, I can tell where Volmarr is going with this and I’m probably not going to like it.

Strict reconstructionists attempt to practice Norse Paganism as close as possible to how it was performed over a thousand years ago. Their goals are often academic and historical in nature—following archaeological records, scholarly interpretations, and surviving lore as strictly as possible. From the type of mead poured in ritual to the precise reconstruction of Iron Age clothing or burial rites, the focus is often on reenacting history with accuracy. In truth, this approach has more in common with living history roleplay than with a living, breathing, evolving spiritual path.

And we come to our first disagreement. Volmarr states that this “reconstructionist” way has more to do with roleplaying than a living spiritual path. Now, I don’t know how long Volmarr has been a Heathen, or what his religious background is before becoming one, but I can say for sure that he hasn’t studied religions as a topic.

In all religions, there are things called Orthodoxy and Orthopraxy, namely “right thinking” and “right doing.” Orthodoxy is the better known of the two, and I’d say at least a few people are familiar with the term because of religious groups like the Orthodox Jews or Orthodox Christians. Traditions that seek to practice, and preserve, the ancient ways of their religions. Personally, I would not consider the practice of these faiths to be “roleplaying” despite their historic nature and often historic “costumes.” It is given this reasoning that I am not so willing to dismiss “Reconstructionist” Heathens as mere roleplayers like he is apparently doing.

Already I can see where Volmarr is going to lean into the “living spiritual path” as the superior option. Now, I am not a reconstructionist myself (we’ll probably get to that later), but despite my general lack of “orthopraxy”, I am not entirely sold on the superiority of “living traditions.”

For one, I’ve seen “living traditions” in other religions. The Reformed Jews, or Evangelical Christians (we’ll get back to them later), for example. Even the “snake handler” churches are examples of “living spirituality” that Volmarr speaks of. While these faith are legitimate, their legitimacy does not trump, nor replace, the legitimacy of more “Orthodoxic” traditions and practices.

Expounding on this line of thought further, the idea of a “living and evolving tradition” strikes me as, well, dangerous and open to corruption. Back in my heyday on this blog, I got into many a discussion or fight with people who wanted to “evolve” Heathen and Pagan traditions to more fit the modern era. People who felt that we need to turn our backs on different aspects of the old ways as “outdated” and replace them with new. Halstead wanted us to remove theism. Rhyd and his friends wanted us to implement Marxism. Others wanted to remove ideas that were “sexist” or “racist” or “homophobic.” They all wanted to change the faith(s) to suit them, rather than change themselves to suit the faith.

And that’s not inherently a bad thing. Some people do connect deeply with the spiritual dimension through historical reenactment. For them, reconstructing ancient rituals and customs may feel reverent and grounding. But it’s important to acknowledge that this is not the only, nor the most accessible, way to walk a spiritual path rooted in the Norse tradition.

There is an assumption here, that faith is meant to be easily accessible. There is also the idea that being “reconstructionist” in nature means that the faith is somehow less accessible. I do not agree with this, not entirely. While I do believe that a faith should be accessible (the sacred texts, to priests of the faith, and even a community of fellow believers), I don’t think it should be a simple matter of you walk up, declare yourself a member, and have everything handed to you.

Many years ago, there were people complaining that Wicca was “the dominant” pagan religion. I’ll be honest, I forget why. Probably jealousy. What I do remember though, was that the explanation I had for Wicca’s popularity was simple: Wicca is the Fruit Loops of paganism. Sweet, sugary, easy to eat, and even easier to digest, at least in its most common form. You pick up a book or two, you read it, you declare yourself a Wiccan, and off you went on a grand spiritual journey of self realization limited only by the idea that you shouldn’t harm people because you’d get it back three fold in turn.

Heathenism, regardless of which branch you follow, isn’t Wicca. It has too many concepts at its heart. Concepts that often run counter to modern day thinking. That the primary forces of the universe aren’t Good and Evil, but rather Order and Chaos and the importance of finding a balance between them. Honor, loyalty, the power and duty of oaths, the importance of family, etc. Things that are not, by their inherent nature, “easily accessible.” I, personally, have had to do a great deal of soul searching and changing the way I think about things over the years of my Heathen practice. Changes that were not easy to access, nor easy to accomplish.

Reconstructionism as Spiritual Roleplay

Let’s be clear—roleplay is not an insult. It is a legitimate form of expression. Historical reenactors often feel transformed when donning the clothes and manners of a bygone time. But that transformation is often theatrical and symbolic, not existential. The strictest forms of Norse Pagan reconstructionism fall into this category. They aren’t really meant to function as a religious practice that addresses modern human needs—emotional healing, personal growth, mystical connection, or guidance through trauma, anxiety, or love. They’re meant to recreate the past as closely as possible. In this, they function more like immersive theater or participatory anthropology.

“…a religious practice that addresses modern human needs…”

To me, these words are dangerous, because I have seen their like before, especially dealing with those who wanted to push Marxism in Paganism. Now, don’t get me wrong, Heathenism, as practiced centuries ago, does have its issues when you bring it into the “modern” world. It isn’t a one to one fit and unlike Christianity, hasn’t had centuries of living alongside society to adapt to changing mores and morals.

Take slavery for instance. From a religious perspective it is still perfectly moral for a Heathen to own slaves. Modern society and morals would disagree. Where do we find the balance? Can we find a balance? Do we uphold the old ways or cast them aside for the new? Do we factor in economics to the question? What about BDSM and its aspects of slavery? This is just one or many questions to be asked, but how do we answer them? By what authority? Does each man choose, or do we call a council of Gothi much like the Orthodox Christians do to decide how our ways move forwards.

What then, of these “modern needs?” Well, Volmarr is nice to list some of them; emotional healing, personal growth, mystical connection, healing trauma, dealing with anxiety, or relationships? Does a “reconstructionist” practice fail to answer these where a “living practice” would succeed?

I’m not so sure. For one, alienation in our society is a big problem, especially among young men. Looking at modern “living practices” well…none of them seem to have come up with a solution. At best they ignore the problem, at worst they demonize it. It’s why figures like Andrew Tate are so popular.

On the topic of personal growth, well, the modern world has stripped away all the old markers for what “personal growth” was and replaced it with things like “advancing your career, getting famous, having a big house and lots of money.” Things that are physically impossible at this point with the way corporations, social media, and the economy work at present.

In terms of “spiritual/mystical” connection, again the present “living” systems fail utterly and completely. Most of spiritualism these days is filled with an essential foundation of “you deserve X from the universe!” Well, if you’re a woman anyways, if you’re a man a lot of it seems to be “you’re a failure/evil/everything wrong with the world.” Doesn’t matter if its pagan, christian, jew, or something else. The more modern the “faith” the more it is either the universe owes you or you fucking suck.

As for love/relationships, again, all the present “living” traditions I know of have completely lost the plot and offer zero solutions. In an age where women are free to fuck and men are considered terrorists if they can’t get laid, what “living solution” is there, at present, to solve these fundamental issues? A phrase I have heard often in the dating realms is “she isn’t yours, it’s just your turn.” I’ve yet to see a “living solution” that wasn’t “deal with it.”

However, if we looked to the “reconstructionist” path, we do see viable solutions to modern problems using ancient solutions. For example, the best way to deal with alienation is to reform the “brotherbond” of old. Groups bound to each other by oaths of blood and honor, who stand fast against a world that is uncaring and often hostile. In terms of personal growth, again, the solution is there; be a person of honor, who upholds their oaths, fulfills their duties, who has the strength to do what must be done and the wisdom to know when and what to do. There are clear markers about becoming stronger, wiser, finding a spouse, starting a family, raising children, growing old and passing on your wisdom. In terms of relationships, there in too lies the answer; find a good partner and stay with them. Do not seek momentary pleasure with whomever you can, but build joy and a life with someone special. Keep your oaths to your partner, belong to them and to no other.

Even in terms of the spiritual and mystical connection, the ‘Reconstructionist’ has the better path. There is an orthdoxy and an orthopraxy. There is a set way to do each rite, there is a set belief of what is right and wrong, there are clear descriptions of the Gods and how they act and what they believe. Sure, maybe it doesn’t always fit with the “modern” world, but then again the modern world is pretty damn fucked up and most of us don’t fit into it anyways. It’s a large part of why so many of us are Heathens…because we don’t fit in with modern views of religion, spirituality, morality, etc.

To the average person seeking spiritual depth, comfort, insight, or healing, this “museum exhibit” approach offers little. It risks becoming a cage of historical fetishism, where one’s personal gnosis is dismissed because it didn’t come from a 13th-century Icelandic manuscript. This strict gatekeeping often stifles the organic, transformative nature of religion, which has always adapted to new cultural contexts throughout history.

If the way offers little, is the way truly for you?

When I first became a Heathen I was a very angry teenager, suffering from a lot of trauma and abuse, and had a grand penchant for violence (even if I held it back). One of the things that drew me to Heathenism was the fact that it did not view violence as inherently evil. Rather, it was what you did with that violence that determined if you were a good or bad person. It was a simplistic view and a simplistic reason, but it was a starting point that began a decades long journey of self discovery and (hopefully) improvement.

As I went along and learned more with each passing year, the depths opened up for me. I grew close to some of the gods, distant to others. I formed a bond with Hel that, by all accounts, seems to be very unique. That depth, however, would not have existed without “reconstructionist” elements. Without the lore, I would not know my Gods, I would not know much of what is right or wrong, I would not know the importance of honor, loyalty, and duty. This “museum exibit” as Volmarr puts it, is the preservation of what was so that I could obtain what is. I had to find the depths of my faith using what had come before. Maybe it didn’t always fit the modern world, but then again I don’t fit the modern world.

Volmarr speaks to how this “fetisisation” of the past prevents adaptation, that it dismisses ‘personal gnosis’ because it doesn’t come from an ancient manuscript. In this he is not wrong, in a way. I personally still remember a time earlier on where I had someone insist I couldn’t be Hel’s Gothi because Hel had never had a recorded Gothi.

Here’s the thing though. The person I was arguing with admitted that other Gods had had dedicated Gothi, that there was precedent to what I was, but refused to accept because what I was hadn’t been (or at least hadn’t been recorded). In this, the person was wrong. However, there are situations where they could have been right.

Over the years, I have seen a lot of “personal gnosis.” I have experienced a fair bit of it myself. After all, there is very little recorded about Hel and much of my learning comes directly from my experiences with her. However, there is something I have learned about personal gnosis: it must always be checked against what original sources you can find.

People like to believe a lot of things. Evangelical Christianity is often based on “personal gnosis” and if you’ve ever studied it, you come to realize that not only can people come up with literally anything they want to, they will, even if it openly contractions things. Heathenism and Paganism are no different. I remember, years ago, a man who claimed to be the priest of a particular celtic goddess who’s domain including Kingship…but not only was he not a monarchist, he was an outright anarchic marxist. His personal gnosis told him his spirituality was right…but literally everything recorded about his deity proved him wrong. Another time (and I might be misremembering this) I think I saw a woman who was dedicated to Frigga (goddess of motherhood) try to claim that Frigga was 100% down with abortion in all its forms. Yet, one look at the lore would tell us that such a thing was theologically impossible.

I will be the last person to dismiss the value of personal gnosis, but I will be the first person to question it and point out that gnosis that goes against proven, recorded facts, is not gnosis…it is make believe. That is why one must always check one’s gnosis with both logic and facts. So having something that tells you “no, you’re wrong” isn’t a detriment to a mystical or spiritual practice, if anything it is a necessity.

The Need for a Living Spiritual Practice

Living spirituality is not frozen in time. It grows with the people who walk it. Modern Norse Paganism must be allowed to breathe—to evolve in the hearts of those who embrace it, integrating the ancient with the modern, the mythic with the mystical, and the historic with the intuitive. After all, the gods themselves are not dead cultural relics. They are living autonomous spiritual beings, beings of great power, meaning, and presence that people can still feel, dream of, and be transformed by today.

Here, Volmarr is fairly correct. The Gods are not “dead cultural relics” but rather living beings. However, the Gods do not change as much as Volmarr seems to be implying here.

Our ancestors and their ways were taught to them by the Gods. This means, in theory and practice, that that is how they wished us to live (at least in terms of culture and morality, if not technology). The morals of back then still largely are the morals the Aesir and Vanir have today. A thousand years is nothing to a God, so I doubt they have changed over much in their views from a thousand years ago when it comes to most matters, especially when we look at the thousands of years that preceded the end of the Viking age and the end of openly practiced Germanic Heathenism.

It is these attitudes that can be felt and transform people. I know, because it has happened with me personally. I didn’t need a “modern, living” interpretation of the faith to find these things. I found these things in the ancient, preserved ways.

The modern world brings different needs than the Viking Age. We wrestle with urban alienation, ecological collapse, neurodivergence, spiritual longing in an age of disconnection, and a search for meaning beyond corporate modernity. We don’t need a historically perfect blot in a longhouse to find sacredness—we need connection, authenticity, and soul-level truth.

Again, see my comment about how the old ways offer solutions to these problems in a modern era. Claiming “you don’t need to have a historically perfect blot in a long hous to find sacredness” is true…but it can make it easier. That’s why churches and temples have always been important and endured.

Hel, a great example of this is the AFA vs most other Heathen branches out there. The AFA, while not strictly reconstructionist, pulls heavily from the historical sources and works to perform their rites with as much orthopraxy as possible in their temples. In turn, they are as far as I know, the fastest growing, most successful Heathen faith in the world.

Compare that to more “modern living” traditions like say the Troth, who attempted to modernize and universalized the faith. Last I heard, years ago…they had imploded and were basically a dead duck. Same of almost any other group like them.

Here’s the thing when it comes to orthodoxy and orthopraxy: that is how you have authentic, soul-level connections. Those Rites were given to us by the Gods. In doing them correctly, we connect with the Gods as they intended for us to. Having temples where everyone gathers, where community is built, is how you build those connections with your fellow believers. That is why Churches have long been the heart of the Christian faith and Christian communities. Because it is through these traditions, these practices, that we build identities and connections with our gods and with each other. If anyone can and does whatever they want, then there is no common ground, no connection, there is only strife and an attitude of “you’re doing it wrong, so you must be wrong, so I shouldn’t be around you.”

A living Norse Pagan practice honors the spirit of the old ways without being enslaved to their letter. It welcomes offerings from today’s world: meditation, trancework, modern rituals, cross-cultural influences, even VR temple spaces or AI rune readings—if they bring the seeker closer to the divine. It dares to believe that Odin, Freyja, and the spirits of the land are not frozen in the Viking Age, but walk beside us now, adapting with us.

“…Without being enslaved to their letter…”

I’ll be honest, I hate this phrase. Look, I’m not saying I follow the letter exactly, but here’s the thing. The Letter exist for a reason. It is the guide book, the instruction manual. Over the course of my life I have enjoyed building things. I built a lot of legos as a kid. I built my computer desk from a kit. Built my computer chair from the same. I’ve invested more money than I like to admit in Dark Eldar models. When I was a teenager I helped my dad remodel parts of our house. The thing is, they all came with instruction manuals and in all my years building things I’ve learned a very important lesson: if you don’t follow the directions, shit doesn’t work. The rules exist for a reason.

The Letter provides a framework. Yes, for some, after many years of study and practice, you can go outside that framework to a degree, but for your average, everyday person? The framework is all they need for a rich, fulfilling, spiritual experience. It tells them what to do, how to do it, and with enough practice they’ll get it right and the world will open up to them. Why? Because it is the instruction manual given to us by the Gods, and there is an arrogance to saying “I know better than the Gods how to worship them” that strikes me as hubris.

It screams too much to me of that meme “silence minority, I am speaking for you because I know better.”

Can things like meditation and trancework have a place in Heathenism? Sure. Heathenism has a long tradition of shamanism and magic…but does your average person need to do them? No. Will it benefit them and give them a stronger mystical experience? Probably not. I don’t know what Valmarr counts as a “modern ritual” but that feels more like change for the sake of change than any sort of actual improvements. What we had was great and you don’t need to fix what isn’t broken.

As for cross-cultural references….like what? From where? Would my worship of Hel be improved by dragging in practices from Santa Muerta? I highly doubt it. Voodoo? Given what I know of that faith and my Goddess, that just seems like a good way to make her upset with me. Christianity or Judaism, faiths utterly antithetical to our own in both morality and cosmology? Buddhism, even though it is a faith that is also rather antithetical to the values of Heathenism?

I’m not saying it is impossible for other “cultures” to offer things of value, but often those things of value were already linked to Heathenism. Metal and its subcultures can certainly offer things to a Modern Heathen, but then again Metal was founded in large part by inspirations from Nose and Germanic Mythology. I’ll admit I have drawn some elements of Goth subcultures and the Dance Macabre of the Black Death into my own Helish practice, but I check with Hel first and both those things were heavily influenced by Death to begin with.

But change for the sake of change, for the sake of “modernism” alone isn’t a viable reason to reject the old and replace it with the new. The old exists for a reason and it’s generally just as viable today as it was then.

There’s Room for Both—But Let’s Be Honest About What They Are

There is nothing wrong with practicing Norse Paganism as living-history roleplay. It can be fun, educational, and even meaningful. But it should not be confused with a universal path to spiritual transformation. Most people today are not looking for perfect historical reenactment—they are looking for purpose, power, belonging, and divine connection. That calls for something alive, not just accurate.

Dismissing “reconstructionism” as “living-history roleplay” is demeaning Volmarr. You may claim that’s not what you want to do, but your entire post is literally “modern good, historical bad.”

But Volmarr is right in that “reconstructionism” shouldn’t be confused with a universal path to spiritual transformation. Thing is though, I have never believed that Heathenism should be a universal path for spiritual transformation. It is a religion (or set of religions) that are meant to worship and honor the Aesir, the Vanir, and Hel. The point to Heathenism is not, and never should be, individual spiritual transformation. It can occur, I myself am a living example of it happening, but that is not the reason it exists.

If you want a universal path to spiritual transformation, things like Buddhism exist. If you want a religion that honors the Gods of your ancestors, teaches you the morality they find pleasing, their philosophies of living, and gives you a culture and community that you are a part of, then you pick Heathenism.

Volmarr says people are looking for purpose, power, belonging, and a divine connection. He isn’t wrong. The thing is though, in my vast travels on the internet and my less vast travels in the physical world, those mean different things than what are in Heathenism. In Heathenism you have a purpose; honor your oath, build a family, have children. Most people don’t want that purpose in life, because it demands sacrifices from them to achieve. Heathenism can provide you with a place of belonging, but that belonging comes at a price; honor and obligation, two things most people these days seemingly want nothing to do with. They want to belong, they’ll go to great lengths to belong, but they’ll also slit each other’s throats over the slightest of disagreements and betray decades long ‘friendships’ over the smallest of slights. A divine connection to most people these days means feeling spiritually fulfilled in a way that the universe is catering to them…not them living in service to higher powers and sacrificing for their sakes. As for power, well…power these days doesn’t mean personal strength to most people, it means dominion and domination over others, not something one generally finds a great support for in Heathenism.

Changing our faiths to cater to these needs might bring in more people for the moment, but in the long run it will destroy everything we have spent generations building.

In the end, both paths—strict reconstruction and adaptive spirituality—have their place. But for the majority of spiritual seekers, the gods do not demand authenticity to the 10th century. They ask for sincerity of the heart, integrity of intent, and the courage to meet them here and now, in the sacred space of this age.

Volmarr is right, there is a place for both the strict recontructionist ways and a place for adaptation. Personally, I think the right path belongs where a balance can be found, where we can adapt when we need to, but not by sacrificing that which came before.

As for what the vast majority of spiritual seekers these days want? Frankly, I say stuff them. They’re looking for Fruit Loops, something sweet and easy that makes them feel good even if it leaves them empty in the end. “What can the universe do for me?” Is, from what I’ve seen, the rallying cry of too many “seekers” over the last several decades. Even worse, are those who cry “I demand you change to fit my beliefs, rather than change myself to fit the beliefs of the Gods I claim to worship.”

Do the Gods demand absolute authenticity to 10^th century practices? No. Hel has always been as pleased with my homemade altars as she would be were I to make my prayers in some grand temple. As Volmarr says, they ask for sincerity, integrity, and courage, but often the best way to show these things is the way they taught our ancestors to show them. The Gods literally told us what to do, which means we don’t have to go and figure it out on our own. It doesn’t have to be perfect, but it is better to try than to toss everything aside for what make you feel good or is easier for you.

Faith demands sacrifice, not convenience. It is not by changing rituals or changing teachings, but by changing one’s self that a person can find spiritual fulfillment. Heathenism doesn’t need to become Modern in order to be relevant to people. I’ve found it answered most of our modern questions long ago, we just forgot the answers or choose to ignore them because they’re inconvenient. Changing our religion so that it better fits people isn’t the answer. From my own personal experience I can say that changing to fit your religion, if it is truly the religion for you, is far, far more spiritually fulfilling. If that is impossible for someone, then maybe it wasn’t the religion for them, and all you’ve done by changing that faith is destroy it for everyone who already fit there.

Hela Bless