Uncharted Waters

 

By: Jonathan Seidel

Athelstan (vikings) and his faith quest: the struggle of faith

Intro:

The TV show vikings was incredible. The narrative followed a great charismatic leader named Ragnar Lothbrok, the first viking to sail west to the christian lands of England. The Nordic countries had sailed east but never west. They ransacked these lands but in the long run sought to trade and make Kattegut their home a central trading station. The show ran for six seasons and only expanded after season three. A favourite part of the show was Ragnar’s relationship with Athelstan. Athelstan was a christian monk Ragnar turned king kept alive and developed a deep connection with. He always heeded his advice and company. Many of his comrades detested this friendship but Ragnar saw Athelstan as a special man. King Egbert of Wessex also took a deep liking to Athelstan trusting him deeply. All three men went through spiritual journeys and transformations. Most notably was Ragnar and Athelstan. Egbert seemed agnostic about his christianity but refused to concede. Ragnar yielded his nordic gods becoming a kind of apostate. He was a tremendous warrior but grew weary of their effect. Athelstan was the influence that caused him to change his outlook. It is noteworthy, Ragnar never accepts Jesus but instead Athelstan’s saintly advice. Ragnar is an interesting study himself and embodies following a saintly individual than a theology per se. For Ragnar it was less if Jesus Christ was genuine and more that his biggest inspiration was a christian. Athelstan’s devotion to christianity focused him away from his gods. This is mere speculation but the Nordic gods were warriors and his peaceful attitude was more christian-like than viking. His agnosticism may reflect his novel vision but it was Athelstan’s dedication that sparked uneasiness in his soul. He was a viking but Athelstan’s spirituality was sufficient. Which leads us to Athelstan himself. He openly admits he oscillates between both gods. He believes in both. A monk devoted to christianity becomes fascinated by the nordic traditions and accepts Odin. He switches back and forth and finally rests with more christianity than viking. His struggle is amusing and important. Athelstan’s journey is reflective of common struggles of average believers. Many believers avoid this existential issue because they boarder themselves off. Those who engage with others are influenced by their culture and theology. This essay will tackle a few questions: Is it possible to believe in multiple gods? How can both be correct simultaneously? Mythic anthropology as a potential resolution? Tradition as the hallmark of connection and return?

Two Gods?

The first issue to tackle is the simultaneous belief in both christian and nordic gods. Religion is an insular framework that is absolute in of itself. Believing in two different gods is heretical. It is not just counter to the religion itself but is logically insufficient. This is not because they both cannot exist but according to the texts the other does not exist. It is possible that both Odin and Zeus exist technically yes but it is difficult to assume. It is more probable that they are talking about the same gods but with varied interpretations. To apply nordic logic to christianity would be to assume Odin is god and Thor and Loki are the angels Gabriel and Lucifer or Thor is Jesus and Loki the Holy Ghost. The mythology does not need to match but to find similarities would bolster the point. Mythology emerges from stories and experiences. This would cause the variations amongst different cultures. The most probable answer is that it is made up and there are no gods. They are social constructions. To be fair, even to us Jews other nations are believing false gods. It is incredible the detail and depth of any mythology. It is creative and brilliant. It does not mean it is legitimate just that it is truly admirable and worth acknowledging. 

In theory, Athelstan broke the religious mantra. It is illegal to believe in both. If one accords with tradition holding onto any foreign deity is a sin of itself. Upholding the theology is a stalemate value of the religion. Yet, what Athelstan remarks is his internalisation of both deities. He sees Odin and is filled with Jesus Christ. It is phenomenal and requires a deeper analysis. This mode of thinking does not attempt to undercut any religion but rather demonstrates a deep respect for the other culture. Induced into viking culture he felt the spiritual aura of the gods. Before engaging a neurological link that imbibes our religious connotations it is imperative to delineate the potentiality of the spirit. When Athelstan says he engages both, it is more metaphorical than literal. He embodies their ideologies not the gods themselves. The sensation is a deep devotion to the cause. This may sound like a psychology project which insinuates that Athelstan was crazy and it was all made up. One can never doubt it. To have a multitude of religions who all vie for supremacy would seem that more likely they are all wrong. Yet, this is not certain. 

We can perceive this issue on two fronts: literally and metaphorically. I do not think necessarily that Athelstan’s dual-belief means that both are simultaneous but that he is spiritually inclined to both sides. Eastern countries and postmodern theories bemoan exclusivist religiosity. When one says they believe in multiple religions, do they uphold the theology or do they accept the practices? These are two different metrics. The latter is similar to the metaphorical junction. A sort of inclusive model readmits a sense of correlation between tradition and folklore. Cultural practices are influenced externally and may be intertwined with other nations. The literal connotation is quite difficult because for any religion the doctrinal aspect is foreign to the believer but it is the dogma that perpetuates the central faith. It is not only believing in the god/s but their mythology as well. Christian mythology and norse mythology are vastly different. Theologically they are opposites: monotheism vs polytheism. Yet, the literality is the worst of the challenge. Paradoxes are non existent in this frame. Either there is one god or there are multiple. Trying to establish both in one universe is improbable. The spiritual connection is the sole legitimate barometer for dual-belief. The spiritual inclination toward both Jesus and Odin stems from immense faith. It is the seclusion of the self to dual-devotion. The sacrifice and intense admiration is dually noted. The spirit is powerful and the soul follows its desire to satisfy the self. 

Metaphorically it is a different question. Metaphorical dual-belief falls under the mythic heuristic. The anthropological sector harbours deep affinity to the cultural influence. Residing in both areas will supply an upheaval of cultural influence. Cultural affiliation designates religious spirituality in its association. It is not just mere actions but those traditionally centred and nationalistic. The mythic perspective supplies an incredible outlet for dual belief. The cultural influence on an individual affects their outlook. Athelstan’s lifestyle amongst the monks and then vikings caused him to re-envision his faith. Partaking in both worlds inspired him to internalise both cultures as legitimate. If the cultures were valid so were their gods. It was not their literal existence but their symbolism. It is what they stand for to the believer. Jesus and Odin signalled salvation to the believer. It was the mighty Thor who gave strength to the viking and Jesus’s atonement to the christian. Faith was all-encompassing. The meaning behind the gods was less celestial and more practical. The gods were synthesised into their bodily frames. The supernal projection would supply them the necessity to survive. None cared for death. The next world was one encompassed with treasure and peace. 

Culture > Theology

It is this latter connotation that I think invests the most valuational depth. Literal encapsulations are marred in the integration. Various cultures have intermingled influences whether notoriously christianity’’s incorporation of pagan ideas. This is different though. Every culture has incorporated external material into its practice. There may be some conformity or redirection. Jews may not like to hear this but there are a few examples that may frighten orthodox scholars but really should not. It is an inescapable aspect of religion. No one is absolutely pure. This does not mean any corruption. Many a time religions will incorporate and redefine the concept in its own terms. A classic example is sacrifices. Maimonides is adamant that it is redirected from pagans. Circumcision and Shabbos are potential others but there is much controversy. A latter example is polygamy or slavery. Society permitted these types of activity but when society wrote it off so did Judaism. It was not championed but coped with. The Bible fails to present one successful polygamous marriage and there are incredible amount of liberty and slave responsibility laws. Judaism has a history of this but in no way does this reduce its prowess or validity. Religion adapts to the growing society. It will retroactively reinterpret new evolution as part of its core. This method of interpretation and sourcing is incredibly manifest in Judaism as a legal culture. It is all encompassing and forever relevant. 

This is not necessarily as relevant to Athelstan because he was really struggling on a theological level and wasn’t concerned with the practical infusion of cultures. Throughout the series his acceptance of nordic customs is apparent and participates in their practices. Ragnar and his son Ubbe do a better job than Athelstan. Athelstan lives purely in the particular culture. He oscillates between who is true and has an existential nightmare. His acceptance of Jesus in his final days is reminiscent of a journey completed. He does not loathe the nordic complexion but it is Jesus for him. Viking gods are foreign and wrong. It lacks any sort of affinity to the rogue believer he was. He has returned after a journey to hell and back. He has chosen his fate. Ragnar notes he and Athelstan will never meet after their deaths because he will be in Valhalla and Athelstan in heaven. It is interesting that Ragnar accepts the possibility that both exist. Though this is potentially less literal and more metaphorical. Still, Ragnar is adamant that they will never meet again. His confidence radiates a possibility of a dual afterlife.  

Strong Tradition

How does Athelstan’s journey parallel Judaism? Nordic and christian religiosity loom large in the viking’s series but how helpful is to the Jewish model? Judaism has always been a small sect amidst larger controlling religions whether christianity islam or Greece before them. Judaism has perpetuated through thick and thin. Many have attempted to bifurcate between the two but what strikes me the most is the theological debate of the medieval times. Today, atheism has disrupted the flow of interfaith debate and colluded religions to fight the non-believers. The ‘my god could beat your god’ argument is unpersuasive in this day and age. Ironically, in the series time period it was relevant but not so much so now. That does not mean it is utterly meaningless. It has always dawned on me the varied religions. Each formulating from a  different origin with different customs. What makes my side so much more genuine? To be honest I do not have good answer theologically. This is not a rational argumentation  debate that will demonstrate Jewish superiority. Unlike Athelstan, I do not happen to be such a spiritual individual. I’m sometimes too rationalist. My scientifically minded brain struggles with supernaturalism. I am quite agnostic about the the divine origins but that does not negate the Jewish prowess. It is not about constructing a superiority complex. Instead it is about recognising the deep history and underpinnings to the faith. A phenomenological view of Jewish history via the shared tribal memory. 

There is a scene in the show where Ubbe though has converted/aligned with the christians on the battlefield wielding his ax he shouts that he feels Odin in his soul. Ubbe acknowledged that his faith was less with some kingdom and more with his people. Fighting in battle reminded him not just of norse mythology and the battles Odin fought but his cultural heritage. All his life he lived in constant battle as a token to the gods and his tradition. He felt his spirit enamoured with inspiration and connection to his peoplehood. Ironically, though I may be mistaken, his wife Torvi felt slightly different. His return to his old gods startled her. She said we’re christians but he just could not let go of his past. His past was not just a belief but a way of life. The same goes for the Jew. Keeping halakha, following the rituals, is not just some service to a divine being but a systematic framework. A lifestyle to guide the Jew. He is encompassed and inspired to live by his heritage and peoplehood. 

Athelstan’s religious journey is characteristic of many believer’s track of uncertainty. Today it is less about switching faiths and more about giving up and coming back. The contemporary Jew struggles to find his place and at times it is the spiritual enlightenment of the divine that pulls him back into servitude. Some kiruv inspiration allures his soul back to the tribe. That was not me. I personally never gave up on Judaism but I did on God. Yet, my association with tribe perpetuated because it was a peoplehood more than a religion. Contra Athelstan, I did not seek spiritual inspiration but cultural affiliation. If I ever were to leave, the halakha would bring me back. Even if I began to fully believe in God and the dogma associated with it (at least as of now), I do not see myself so affixed to it. It has and still is the active nature of Jewish participation that captivates my engagement. Jews follow these practices. Jews act this way. That is inspiring, that is binding. 

Leadership and Struggle 

To conclude is noteworthy that Jews follow leaders. Ragnar proceeded after Athelstan. Sages impart their wisdom to the masses. There happens to be a wise sage in the viking series who offers advice and wisdom. Athelstan resembles a charismatic sage who leads the flock. Jewish tradition has a few notable examples such as Shabbatai Tzvi and Jacob Frank. Where Athelstan differs is in his singularity. He does not attempt to start a movement. He acts alone. Ragnar follows him but like Elijah, Elisha is his only disciple. Though not the biggest mystic fan, the early hassidic masters also began with small followings. One should follow his own path, if others follow so they shall but one on a faith journey is not to encourage others to follow but encourage to seek their own path. Ragnar ultimately ends his life returning to his gods. He is fond of Athelstan but remains true to his traditions in the end. The religious believer is on a lone journey to seek out for himself where he stands. Even if he follows a mentor do not mimic, discover your route. Yet, there is an additional mark that Athelstan does not represent. Leaders are necessary. The rabbis have interpreted and taught the divine will for millennium. There is an aspect that cares more for Torah than God. The Jew heeds his teachers in obeying the divine will as a cultural expression of God’s hand. Yet, he is also on his personal journey in my own terms as an individual in the community. Even a cultural community detests uniform robots. All Americans keep the constitution but they are not on the same wavelength. There are different levels but also varied methods of expression within the scope of halakha. The Jew is an individual yet a part of the community. A soldier in the army. He slashes at his beat for his brethren. 

Athelstan represents a dual-pronged approach. The student and the master. Athelstan is true to himself. As a believer he mightily struggles to overcome his religious battle. It is this fight that is inspiring. Ragnar and Egbert are inspired by his struggle. Though others agonise over his constant oscillation. It is their shortsightedness that prevents them from acknowledging his true struggle. For them, Floki especially, and his viking brethren conceive such oscillation as undesirable. Either you’re in or you’re out. There is no middle ground. That being said, Floki and the others distrust christians for good reason. Still, even on theological grounds it is reasonable to be sceptical. Floki is not asserting that christians cannot act their way but to doubt the gods it is doubt being viking. Living amidst the nordic population as a heretic is unfathomable. It is the home of the gods. If you wish to believe otherwise live elsewhere. Athelstan’s foreignness is tested because he is welcomed as who he is and even as he grows he lingers to his christian past. Floki cannot see past this. Athelstan remains a christian. Rollo, Ragnar’s brother who converts to christianity is a traitor. Christians may be in error but it is worse to become them than to be them. Floki saw Athelstan as attacking his faith and corrupting it. His uncertainty and inconsistency only raised more eyebrows.     

Athelstan’s journey is remarkable not just to the evangelical christian who advocates the salvation of Jesus Christ but to any believer who comprehends the challenge of faith. The Jew too, for many reasons including something as tragic as the holocaust questions his faith. Where is God? Why did he not help? Does he even care? Does he even exist? The Jew has been challenged time and time again whether through violent force or educational coercion. The Jew embodies Athelstan’s motives. He is captured brought to a foreign land and may even take up their culture. It is not all too striking that he may oscillate. He cannot reject his tradition absolutely. The Jewish tradition is even closer and more intimate than christianity. The familial and national closeness imbibe a deep link to the past generations and to the present people. The tight knit relationship is difficult to erase. Though not entirely parallel, leaving the faith for secularism does leave something to take notice. Jewish tradition demands allegiance to the past, secularism does not. Caught in between a lifestyle away from the past is relieving to an extent. Still, the Jew suffers as he can’t break away for good. People do leave the faith but it would be curious to survey how many grown up religious individuals have left it entirely with no connection. Even those who have ceased practicing are still proud of their faith. Their Jewish identity runs deeper than rituals. It is a call to peoplehood and trans-generational linkage. 

The revival of Jewish faith not just in God but in his people (which should always be primary; perceiving Judaism tribally instead of religiously) has ignited an inspirational flame to Jewish return. Jews know their home. Through thick and thin Jews persist. Their commitment to God and each other is foundational. Athelstan represents the believer’s dialectic, stuck in between two worlds. Do you remain true to your childhood life or do you accept your new reality. Exposure to the outside world can really upend the old ways. For one thing, Judaism is tough and exceedingly demanding. Its restrictions and obligations are uniquely opposed to modern secularism. The dilemma at times is an easy response either to black out the new as evil and retain the old or to sweep aside the old and pursue the new. The glamour of the modern world is enticing. In the same way Athelstan’s nordic life was more active and in sense more materialistic than his monk life. The Jew need not be ascetic but it is vital to live by one’s values. It is not so much the stuff but more what underlies the action. The rituals themselves can be a burden but they represent a tradition and an identity so central to the core. Athelstan could not rescind his link to his past and though enjoyed his viking aspirations, it was insufficient for him. The Jew as well, struggles between two worlds. The choice is voluntary but the struggle is real.