The Immaculate Perception: Appearance and Religion in Elliot-Binns' "Religion in the Victorian Era"

     L.E. Elliot-Binns examined the relationship between the progression of religion and the rapid societal

changes that were taking place during the Victorian Era in his book Religion in the Victorian Era,

specifically in the section titled “New Methods.” Elliot-Binns notes how because of the heavy class

division that took place during the Victorian Era, the Church of England’s biggest issue was to adjust how

they could maintain appeal for the maximum number of people, a tall order under the context of class

division (Elliot-Binns, 420). When dealing with specifically the lower classes, there was a need to create

appeal from a source separate from the typical church services offered, which was theorized to stem from

a lack of a sense of belonging because of how “respectable and comfortable-looking (Elliot-Binns, 422),”

the usual church goers would carry themselves. There’s slight irony in the fact that the church that

emphasizes a sense of belonging is struggling to appeal to an entire group of people because they don’t

feel they belong. More importantly it demonstrates the intricate role appearance plays in religion. After

furthering the thought of appearance in terms of the relationship with lower classes, I will examine how

appearance plays a role in the context of gender.

    Opening up outside services was not enough to fully appeal to the lower classes. The church needed to sell their product to those classes, which they attempted to do through missions of “preaching in the open air (Elliot-Binns, 423).” The church had to go out and convince people through verbal presentation why they need the church in their life, even though the church desperately needed the people in their life. A sense of superiority is embedded in those methods. That the almighty church has all the answers and you, the slow helpless peasant, have all the questions. The church uses that appearance of superiority as a chokehold over people who have limited options. Organized religion rewards patience and acceptance of an unsatisfactory existence with the hope that it will all pay off in the end, after you die, if you create and maintain the appearance of being a believer. Giving off a gilded appearance of help with a reward that is not tangible. That’s not to say there are people who are involved in the church who have actually made a positive impact in people’s lives, but on the broad scale there might be more of a focus on preserving that appearance than following through on it. 

Appearance in the context of religion is crucial when you talk about gender, specifically for women. Mary, the mother of Jesus, is by far the most prominent woman biblical figure, and one could argue that she is just as if not more important to Christianity than Jesus, himself. However, there is a stronger push to idolize Mary as a woman, than there is to idolize Jesus as a man. Which creates a double standard, because Jesus is not pushed to be idolized because he is the son of God and by extension God himself, which is accepted as unrealistic standards to live up to. However, Mary has equally unrealistic expectations, given that she has given birth while being a virgin, but she is glorified as the standard for how a woman should carry themselves in terms of sexuality. The virginity of Mary is so strongly associated with her that it is oftentimes mentioned before her name as a prefix, emphasizing an importance of a pure appearance for women, and associating a term that has sexual connotations in its nature to a figure that is supposed to be completely un-sexual. This association promotes sexualization of women while demoting women’s individual exploration of their own sexuality, creating a situation where women can not win. This creates two negative stereotypes for women; either being seen as “prude” or “easy”. Both riddled with objectification, pushing a narrative where men’s perception of women define their sexual expressiveness.