Pope Francis on Literature’s Contribution to Personal Development

I was recently introduced to a letter written by Pope Francis on July 17 2024, published the 4th of August. Titled “LETTER OF HIS HOLINESS POPE FRANCIS ON THE ROLE OF LITERATURE IN FORMATION”, it was addressed to future priests, pastoral workers, and Christians to urge consideration of literature and its’ role in one’s path to personal maturity.

The letter also addresses some of the cultural changes of the past 100 years, specifically in regards to media and the ethical concerns of modern media consumption habits. Like the increasing reliance on “screens”, social media—you know the drill.

On its own, the letter reads well: it is an enlightening and complex letter detailing Pope Francis’s personal beliefs and experiences regarding the importance of literature in one’s life. It is extremely eloquent, bringing in numerous outside sources and the pope’s personal past experiences as a teacher.

So why am I writing about this? Well, I have interest and experience in some of the holistic properties of media, which can help expand on this topic to point out what the pope’s letter is missing—particularly in contemporary cultural observations—and what the Pope does shockingly well. Additionally, I want to re-frame some of what the Pope talks about so it takes a form more recognizable to contemporary discussion. The Pope expresses some complicated questions and statements that may seem esoteric, but with a little focus, they become more relatable and digestible.

Getting Into The Letter

Christianity In The Letter

The Pope opens with his purpose for writing the letter, originally wanting to write about priestly formation but changing it to address all Christians: “What I would like to address here is the value of reading novels and poems as part of one’s path to personal maturity”.

Obviously this applies to more than just Christians but the Pope has his primary audience and duty to them. One interesting claim I found online was that “I haven’t read a better explanation of the universal value of literature in many years. I doubt, however, that many will care to read it just because of who wrote it” (Reddit, /r/literature).

The second point strikes me as more complicated than it lets on: anyone who is well read, intelligent, and into literature would find the letter worth reading for its content. Anyone who would choose not to read it for its author, probably isn’t well read or intelligent. So I imagine anyone who wouldn’t read the letter primarily because of the author wouldn’t read it in the first place for its content—because “bigoted” or “close minded” are synonymous with “less intelligent”.

The letter is well written and it doesn’t limit itself due to the Pope’s duty to Christian readers but it includes a lot of Christian references—to no one’s detriment, as this letter doesn’t take the role of a research paper attempting to establish claims or evidence, but instead works off the Pope’s knowledge of the topic (which obviously contains many Christian artifacts).

In fact, the commitment to Christianity gives numerous looks into the intricate written history that Christianity possesses. When religion centers so much around a fundamental text or gospel, literary criticism and literature become intertwined with practicing the religion.

Pope Paul VI promulgates in a 1965 message, that “the Church has always had the duty of scrutinizing the signs of the times and of interpreting them in the light of the Gospel”. Part of this means reinterpreting what is already there to apply it to life hundreds or even thousands of years later.

Pope Francis cites not only from Basil of Caesarea, a bishop from the 4th century, the New Testament, and Saint Paul VI (pope from 1963 to 1978), but also from people like C.S. Lewis and T.S. Eliot whom are popular figures in art. So the letter is not tightly packed Christian fundamentalism with strong political tones but rather a personal sharing of something important to the pope that builds off both his Christian experiences and his secular experiences.

Now, into the content of the letter.

Literature and its Role in Formation

First I want to address some minor points in the opening paragraphs of the letter. In the second paragraph, the Pope says

“Often during periods of boredom on holiday, in the heat and quiet of some deserted neighbourhood, finding a good book to read can provide an oasis that keeps us from other choices that are less wholesome. Likewise, in moments of weariness, anger, disappointment or failure, when prayer itself does not help us find inner serenity, a good book can help us weather the storm until we find peace of mind”.

On my first read, this struck me as insignificant and out of touch: the concept of hobby time as a way to prevent us from doing wrong is something I’ve scarcely heard discussed. Most people think of books as a productive task, one that creates value rather than one that avoids worse activities. The Pope assigning books to this task is quite the opposite of what I think about when it comes to needing a quick fix or distraction from the difficulties of life. Literature is too “slow” and requires too much self involvement and thinking to be a good choice for “distraction media” in the era of phones with TikTok, gaming, and social media. I personally find if I am in a bad state of mind I cannot focus on reading because it requires too much investment and thinking to absorb the text. However, I do agree with the Pope when he follows up, saying that

Time spent reading may well open up new interior spaces that help us to avoid becoming trapped by a few obsessive thoughts that can stand in the way of our personal growth”. Thus, the first statement does not fit well with the former. I cannot focus on the personal growth that will help me with the issues I’m facing when the issue is suffocating. I think literature can help with those obsessive thoughts but to place these two statements next to each other feels like a “Problem/Solution” framing of the situation when the matter exists in a more ethereal realm that eludes objectivity.

Indeed, before our present unremitting exposure to social media, mobile phones and other devices, reading was a common experience, and those who went through it know what I mean. It is not something completely outdated.

I too have contempt towards the contemporary relationship with media…

Paragraph 3 gets into some concepts that are complicated, and to summarize, he states that audio-visual media is “more self-contained” whereas books require more personal investment. Even if there was such a thing as a perfect conversion of a book to a movie or movie to a book, the form of the media brings with it implicit qualities that impact both our experience and our growth in separate ways. My belief regarding this is that the implicit strengths of the media shine brighter the better the text or film is, to which I will also contend that “better” must deal with complexity and depth.

Many good books, therefore, offer natural resistances, not problems that could have been solved by simpler writing. And more to the practical point: what are we to do with the countless good books that already have been written, many of which, perhaps most, are not models of message clarity? We should recognize this as one of their strengths. They gain part of their value because they can be so difficult, because they require patience and devotion. Is it even possible for TV to provide such difficulties? When have you heard someone on T.V. use a word you didn’t know? Television, as Neil Postman observes, mainly panders to viewers and tries to keep them amused. On the whole, TV provides pleasurable leisure rather than laborious recreation and so it robs viewers of the struggle to make meaning (Anton, 27).

Both the Pope and this quotation from Anton’s book Communication Uncovered use the term “good book”, but in different ways.

Anton pleads with his readers to read good books, saying that

“Consider times when we engage in what could be called “easy reading” or simply “looking at information.” Such activities are characterized by quick glances over familiar words and syntax. Easy reading means we access instant information, and immediate consumability–whether by the consummate reader or the semi-literate–is the measure of message clarity. This can be set in contrast with what might be called “difficult reading” or “serious study.” Difficult reading takes time. Readers encounter unknown words, familiar words used in unfamiliar ways, as well as long and complex syntactical structures. “Information,” if this is delivered over in difficult reading, must be ruminated upon and hence is obtained only gradually. Because students can be deeply misinformed about the demands of difficult reading (or are simply unwilling to make the needed effort), they may assume that all reading should be easy reading. Difficult reading, scorned for not being instantly consumable, is thereby defined out of the picture, and thus, many good books are avoided altogether” (18).

He contends that good books are ones that possess a particular set of qualities— contrary to good book meaning one that is enjoyed by many.

The Pope, on the other hand, gives us a differing opinion regarding personal choice of books:

“Between 1964 and 1965, at the age of 28, I taught literature at a Jesuit school in Santa Fe. I taught the last two years of high school and had to ensure that my pupils studied El Cid. The students were not happy; they used to ask if they could read García Lorca instead. So I decided that they could read El Cid at home, and during the lessons I would discuss the authors the students liked best. Of course, they wanted to read contemporary literary works. Yet, as they read those works that interested them at that moment, they developed a more general taste for literature and poetry, and thus they moved on to other authors. In the end, our hearts always seek something greater, and individuals will find their own way in literature”.

The Pope believes that any reading is part of the path that will bring people to the qualities that literature provides at its greatest, whereas Anton believes that the path to literature enlightenment is one that we need to help others reach. Leaving readers to their own devices will result in them reading My Vampire Husband rather than Crime and Punishment. Not that there’s anything wrong with being a romance or young adult novel fanatic, but it personally feels like those readers are missing out on both greater books and a greater life sometimes. At least, greater books led to a greater life for me.

Part of elitism exists in the elites wanting to help others enjoy the same experiences they’ve had— I cannot go back to romance or young adult novels after the life changing experiences I have had with good books.

This is one of the weaknesses of the Pope’s letter: despite his advocating for literature as an essential part of personal development and formation, I believe he lacks the most in depth context of contemporary media habits. He is well informed, with statements like “I very much appreciate the fact that at least some seminaries have reacted to the obsession with ‘screens’ and with toxic, superficial and violent fake news, by devoting time and attention to literature”, but unfortunately part of in depth contemporary media comprehension means understanding the pervasive influence of media fanaticism: people who have created a personality out of being a fan of a tv show, game, or author. Thus, its hard to personally validate a claim that general reading leads to “something greater”, as I feel people personally try to comfort themselves with the familiar instead of looking for the new. I find myself doing this too, and have to make a conscious effort to be open to new things. Particularly music, sometimes listening to new music can be somewhat anxiety inducing compared to choosing to listen to something I already love.

Faith and Culture

Next, the Pope goes into a section titled “Faith and Culture”, which can be summarized by this paragraph (9)

“How can we reach the core of cultures ancient and new if we are unfamiliar with, disregard or dismiss their symbols, messages, artistic expressions and the stories with which they have captured and evoked their loftiest ideals and aspirations, as well as their deepest sufferings, fears and passions? How can we speak to the hearts of men and women if we ignore, set aside or fail to appreciate the “stories” by which they sought to express and lay bare the drama of their lived experience in novels and poems?”

Paul Valery, whom you might know from the absolute smash hit of a quote “A poem is never finished; only abandoned” also says that “A poem is really a kind of machine for producing the poetic state of mind by means of words” in “Poetry and Abstract Thought”.

“It happens first to the poet, and in the course of writing, the poet eventually makes something, a little machine, one that for the reader produces discoveries, connections, glimmers of expression. Whatever it does it can do again and again, as many times as we need it”.

So that is how we can “reach the core of cultures ancient and new…”— if experience is the way we grow and connect more with the world around us—

“Education is an admirable thing. But it is well to remember from time to time that nothing that is worth knowing can be taught” (Oscar Wilde)

Then perhaps it can be said that literature is one of the closest alternatives to what experience is. As the Pope quotes from Proust,

“Novels unleash ‘in us, in the space of an hour, all the possible joys and misfortunes that, in life, it would take us entire years to know even slightly, and of which the most intense would never be revealed to us because the slowness with which they occur prevents us from perceiving them’”.

Listening to another person’s voice

The Pope has a section called “Listening to another person’s voice” in which he opens with a indirect quotation:

“the great Argentinean writer Jorge Luis Borges used to tell his students, namely that the most important thing is simply to read, to enter into direct contact with literature, to immerse oneself in the living text in front of us, rather than to fixate on ideas and critical comments. Borges explained this idea to his students by saying that at first they may understand very little of what they are reading, but in any case they are hearing ‘another person’s voice’. This is a definition of literature that I like very much: listening to another person’s voice. We must never forget how dangerous it is to stop listening to the voice of other people when they challenge us!”

I’ve already stated how I don’t necessarily believe that “the most important thing is simply to read”, but the concept of an emotional connection to the author is an apt observation.

As Harold Brodkey states,

“Reading is an intimate act, perhaps more intimate than any other human act. I say that because of the prolonged (or intense) exposure of one mind to another”.

The Pope frames this in a spiritual way, saying that their ministry is to preach, and that authors can “’touch’ the hearts of others, so that they may be opened to the message of the Lord Jesus”. He continues by quoting T.S. Eliot, who “perceptively described today’s religious crisis as that of a widespread emotional incapacity”.

“If we are to believe this diagnosis, the problem for faith today is not primarily that of believing more or believing less with regard to particular doctrines. Rather, it is the inability of so many of our contemporaries to be profoundly moved in the face of God, his creation and other human beings”.

I point this out because I see so many people fascinated with the popular and powerful before even attempting contemplation of the everyday around them. Such is art that the significance of a statement is contingent upon its speaker. My personal growth in reading led to appraisal of writing without factoring in popularity. Once I was able to find what was beautiful without the word or authority of another figure qualifying it, I found myself enamored with what most people would find ordinary. The amount of amazing writers that have me enamored with something as simple as an article or blog post created a greater appreciation for the ordinary around me. In turn, it also helps me form better emotional connections with others as I am able to recognize the sublime in a relationship or conversation.

Continuing and ending the letter

The last 3 sections deal with the interior and convey such with the use of clever metaphors—but can feel a bit funny:

“Literature, then, sensitizes us to the relationship between forms of expression and meaning. It offers a training in discernment, honing the capacity of the future priest to gain insight into his own interiority and into the world around him… The difficulty or tedium that we feel in reading certain texts is not necessarily bad or useless… In reading a novel or a work of poetry, the reader actually experiences ‘being read’ by the words that he or she is reading. Readers can thus be compared to players on a field: they play the game, but the game is also played through them, in the sense that they are totally caught up in the action” (26).

“Literature helps us to reflect on the meaning of our presence in this world, to ‘digest’ and assimilate it, and to grasp what lies beneath the surface of our experience… ‘seeing through the eyes of others’, thus gaining a breadth of perspective that broadens our humanity” (33).

If you don’t look close enough, these portions of the letter can sound repetitive. I believe that part of this is the brain’s quick decision to conglomerate platitudes into “its good in some abstract way or something” to avoid having to look into the depth of the message. Additionally, when receiving information pertaining to how to improve oneself, one hears it so often that it can often phase right through us. This is valuable information, but it is hard to focus on. And yet, the Pope coalesces our connection to the intangible with a beautiful closing paragraph:

“The affinity between priest and poet thus shines forth in the mysterious and indissoluble sacramental union between the divine Word and our human words, giving rise to a ministry that becomes a service born of listening and compassion, a charism that becomes responsibility, a vision of the true and the good that discloses itself as beauty. How can we fail to reflect on the words left us by the poet Paul Celan: ‘Those who truly learn to see, draw close to what is unseen’”.

Epilogue

Close reading of this letter surprised me with the elegance and intelligence that the Pope possesses. It made me reassess my relationship with leaders— who leads the world today, from authority or popularity— and what qualities they assert. I believe that the Pope is burdened with a responsibility to act according to the faith and the organization behind it, and that this letter was eye opening to his personal character, intelligence, and wit. I can only hope that those in positions of power around the world can come close to this level of expression and elegance that the Pope shows in this letter.

It pains me reading this letter to know that, even if this letter is from the Pope himself, these words barely register as a drop in the bucket to most, least of all to most the people around me who form what is literally, my world. I understand how some long for the days where some intelligent event might disrupt the community for days on end–a periodical or essay sparks discussion on our relationship with media and the world.

Unfortunately, we will have to settle for debates where a candidate for one of the most powerful positions in the world brings up rumors that immigrants are eating citizens’ pets.