In the seemingly ever growing, diverse, and developing fields of comparative education, specific parts of integrative processes in many countries’ religious education (RE) also appears to develop. Whereas many countries’ religious educations tend to act upon integrative aspirations, many of them take different routes as well. Even so, does the more specific part of “Lived Religion”. This study aims to ask and inquire into some of the comparative questions that might occur while reading about different countries’ different forms of implementation of Lived Religion in their education (e.g. In what different ways does Lived Religion seem to be interpreted, understood, and treated?). This is done by examining and comparing three different examples of Nordic studies (Sweden, Norway, and Finland) that refer to the implementation of Lived Religion in their classrooms, as primary materials. This paper concludes that there is an apparent need of more research in this matter, both nationally and comparatively. Whereas also Lived Religion is both treated and understood differently between the examined prime materials, there are though some fruitful similarities and differences that can be worthwhile drawing. While the Lived Religious aspects might be tough to educate, as with many other integrative matters, it is discussed that there is several benefits ongoingly understanding and comparing Lived Religion as a field of research in the classrooms (when it comes to approaching the aspirating integrative ambitions underlying the chosen countries’ curricula and religious educations). Even though this kind of “Lived” understanding of how Religion and Religiousness works for many people and is compatible with the ambitions the chosen Nordic countries has, there are also some similarities and differences regarding the difficulties implementing these kinds of understandings in the classroom. Both because of curricular and practical reasons.