In modern days there is a growing detachment to be seen in the relationship of religion and

literature. Literature continues to be separated from the ethical values of society and that is why
TS Eliot saw the need to write on the relation of religion to literature.
This essay can be viewed as a reaction against the tradition of viewing a literary work from
purely aesthetic point of view. Many critics, especially New Critics, believed that literature is not
to be valued for its ethical and theological significance. But TS Eliot held the opinion that only
literary criticism was not sufficient. According to him,
"Literary criticism should be completed by criticism from a definite ethical and
theological standpoint."
After a literary work has been viewed as a work of imagination, it should also be considered
from an ethical and theological point of view. It is all the more important in our age when there is
no agreement on ethical and theological values. For a certain in the greatness of a literary work,
that work of imagination should be appreciated from ethical and theoretical angles.
In his essay 'Religion and Literature' published in 1935, he discussed the application of religion
to literary criticism.
…I am not concerned primarily with Religious Literature. I am concerned with what
should be the relation between religion and all Literature…
He mentioned three types of religious literature, in digression. First, is the religious literature
which has literary qualities in it. For instance, the authorised version of the Bible or the works of
Jeremy Taylor. Those persons who describe the Bible only as a literary work and talk of its
influence on English Literature, have been referred to as 'parasites'. According to Eliot, the Bible
is to be considered as the 'Word of God.' In this sense, religious literature is not much different
from Historical Literature or Scientific Literature. Secondly, Eliot asserts that religious literature
manifests itself as a Religious or Devotional Poetry, and this kind of poetry is called minor
poetry for most of the true poetry lovers. Eliot claims that its focus seems narrow as it isolates
the issues of religious spirits at the expense of what men consider the major passions.
According to Eliot, …the religious poet is not a poet who is treating the whole subject
matter of poetry in a religious spirit, but a poet who is dealing with the confined part of
the subject matter: who is leaving out what men consider their major passions, and
thereby confessing his ignorance of them…
Eliot considers poets like Spencer, Hopkins Vaughan and Southwell as minor points while
Dante, Corneille and Racine as major poets. Finally, certain kinds of religious literature may
come under the heading of propaganda. By 'propaganda' Eliot means the desire to forward
certain religious viewpoints. For instance, Chesterton's 'Man who was Thursday' and 'Father
Brown'. These kinds of works do not interest Eliot in his present critical effort because he wants,
he says, a “literature which should be unconsciously, rather than deliberately and
defiantly, Christian.”