teacher's work, but one of the most significant opportunities presented to him.

Since such statements as those quoted at the opening of this chapter are characteristic of many groups of young people, and since the dramatic instinct is an important factor in the "developing life," it may be safely stated as a fundamental thesis that the providing of the right sort of material, the guidance of these eager searchers for "plays" to the truly worth-while bits of material amid the floods of light, foolish, or trashy "stuff" and their training in the giving of these worth-while dramas is a real challenge to the energy, the ability, the consecration, and the daring of every teacher of religion.

There is a real need for the wise, sane, and truly devotional and genuinely Christian development of this God-implanted instinct to "play" the story, to "act a part," to forget for the moment the commonplace surroundings of the every-day life and live in a "different" atmosphere. And it is to the teacher of youth that this “challenge of a real need" comes in a very special sense. Not for a moment should we overlook the wonderful opportunity which this dramatic instinct opens to the teacher of the little children of the Beginners' and Primary Departments, or neglect to make emphatic the joy which can come to that wise and thoughtful teacher who knows how to make the lesson story real by guiding the "playing" of it in the beautifully spontaneous dramatic activity of childhood.

But even stronger and more clear is the challenge of this real need to the teacher of a class of young people, especially those in their teens, because of the increased capabilities of appreciation which have come with the years, the richer possibilities of interpretation, and the ability to undertake a real task and hold to it until its accomplishment.

When this God-implanted instinct, which so often finds its only expression in the lighter, funny (sometimes silly) type of "plays,” can be guided into an expression in noble words, dignified action, and beautiful settings, then a real victory has been achieved, a real need met, an achievement attained of which one may well be proud.

Nor is this challenge so difficult of realization. At least one of the reasons for the wide-spread prevalence of the "college farce" type of dramatic entertainment, even in church circles, is the fact that until recently this sort of material was so much more widely

advertised than the other type, that it was quite the natural thing for young people to think that "The New Minister" and the "Deestrict Skule" sort of thing was all there was for them to use. But some one asks, Will the young people, especially the younger young people, take to the more serious type of material? Can we really get them to want to present a Biblical drama, for instance, instead of a college farce? Will they really get interested in the story of Ruth or Elijah or Paul, or in some missionary drama? Fortunately, the number of those brave souls who have dared to attempt the unusual in the face of oft-repeated "It can't be done " and sometimes reiterated "It ought not to be done," has now increased to the point where it is entirely possible to answer to these questions a most emphatic "Yes, they will be interested-they will really want to do the better things."

Hence, to every teacher and leader of youth, whether in Sundayschool class, young people's society, World Wide Guild, Boy Scout Troop, Camp Fire Circle, or unorganized group, comes the challenge of this real opportunity. And it is today a more insistent challenge than ever before. With the call of commercialized amusements becoming constantly louder and louder, and at the same time the tendency of industry making the working-day more and more merely mechanical and less thought-requiring, the church must fit its work to the needs of the day in which it dwells. Without ever descending to the low levels of "cheapness" which characterize so very large a proportion of the commercialized amusements of today, the church may, if it will, minister to the real needs of the youth whose days are spent (in so many instances) in the deadening monotony of machinelike toil, and whose evenings (quite naturally) are spent in the relaxation (?) of movie "thrillers," which for the moment at least offer an Aladdin's lamp of wonderful genius to open the portals of other and more beautiful worlds.

"If it will "-and the teachers of youth within the church are the ones to say whether or no the church will hear and heed this challenge, enter this "open door" of rare opportunity, and lead down the broad paths of beauty and truth in God's great "Playtime Garden" the eager feet of the fun-loving, beauty-loving, joyloving youth through the right, wise development of the God-given dramatic instinct.

II

THE PLACE OF DRAMATIZATION IN THE CHURCH

There are many earnest workers in the church to whom such a title as that of this chapter comes with something of a shock of a cold plunge on a chilly morning. "Dramatization in the Church"? "Its Place"? But, of course, it has no place in the church. The place of dramatization is in the theater, not the church. This is the perfectly natural reasoning of some whose vision has so far failed to take in the full scope of the significance of the fact of the God-implanted dramatic instinct.

Since this is a God-implanted instinct, and since it, like other instincts, demands some opportunities of expression, and since it is the church's business and its supreme opportunity to minister to the whole of life, it naturally follows that there must needs be a place for dramatization in the church.

The Suggestions of History

A study of the past is frequently most illuminating with reference to the problems of the present. And this general principle holds true in the realm of the dramatic. Whether our study of the past is along the lines of the history of the Christian church, or whether it is along the avenue of literature, particularly English literature, or whether we follow the road of dramatic interpretation, we are bound to arrive at the same crossroads of historic, literary, and dramatic interest. And it is dramatic in its interest, and intensely interesting in its "dramatic-ness," when we arrive at the earliest known specimen of English drama to find that it is nothing else than a dramatic arrangement of the story of the Resurrection, arranged by the clergy of the church, to be acted by the clergy and played within the walls, yea, even within the chancel of the church!

Nor should we stop here in the surroundings of the ninth century and its immediate successors with the development of the "Mysteries," the "Miracles," and the "Moralities," important and significant as were these forerunners of the Religious Drama of today. We may wisely follow the beckonings of the past back into

Or we may follow still further the beckoning hand of the past, back into the days of Judaism, and watch the Temple ritual with ts intensely dramatic ceremony of the bringing, the examination, he acceptance, and the offering of the sacrifice-always on behalf f the man who brought it, always speaking in dramatic way of the ubstitution of the animal for the man.

Yes, drama and religion, however much the custom and usage f modern days may have divorced them and forced them apart nto different and sometimes seemingly opposing channels, are not nly not antagonistic, they are fundamentally one!

In its true eginnings and its real essence drama is religious; and equally, much of its outward expression, religion is dramatic.

To quote again from Doctor Osgood:

Religious drama is more truly defined as a dramatic worship-form, enlistg all the worshipers (at least in spirit) in the utterance of an emotion beyond ere words. Religious drama at its best is akin to the sacraments on their turgical side. Religious drama is prayer, praise, and teaching, by means of eauty and symbolism and poetry and lived truth.

A little boy suddenly got up from the floor where he had been sitting, nd threw his arms around his mother's neck to kiss her; and he said, “I just as thinking how much I love you, and I had to do something about it! This the idea behind truly religious drama: we have an emotion which cold prose ords will not say; we have to utter what we feel with our whole being, and gether.

From the view-point of history, then, we are compelled to agree at dramatization has a rightful place in the church. And the ext step is a logical one, in view of the knowledge gained through ur study of history, namely, that the place of dramatization in the nurch is not merely, nor chiefly (perhaps hardly at all), a place of ntertainment.

It is obvious that the type of drama which alone can be condered in the church, is the religious drama. And if Doctor Osgood

is right, in religious drama we express ourselves in united emotional reaction to the conception of some great religious truth.

And if this is conceded, it naturally follows that the place of dramatization in the life and work of the church cannot be a minor, semioccasional, happenstance sort of a place, but, on the contrary, it must needs be a planned place-a large place, a place of prominence and power. A place, in short, where the largest possible number of the people may be used in some way in the worship through drama, and the message of the drama reach and thrill the largest possible number of worshipers.

Having granted these premises, is it too much to ask that we arrive at the logical conclusion that the proper" place " for religious drama is the church-that portion of the building set apart for worship, not that part ordinarily given to entertainment and social purposes? And is it too much to suggest that the place, so far as time is concerned, is in connection with the worship services of the church?

But it must always be kept in mind, both of participants and audience, that the purpose of this dramatic presentation is worship. And when this is kept in mind and emphasized with quiet effectiveness, there can be no question as to the appropriateness of the presentation of Bible dramas and missionary pageants in the church in connection with a service of worship on the Lord's Day.

Its Place in the Church's Program

Another phase of this question of the place of dramatization in the church is the place which this type of " expressional activity is to have in the planned program of the church's life. The "program" of the average church includes (usually) two services of worship on Sunday, with a Sunday-school session tacked on or sandwiched in somewhere as an extra. Many churches add to this "program" a young people's meeting, and sometimes a junior meeting in the afternoon. Besides this sometimes feverish activity on the Lord's Day, most churches include in their program a midweek prayer-meeting which is frequently conspicuous by reason of two things, the smallness of its attendance and the almost complete absence of prayer. Many churches also add a more or less regular program of social activities, frequently graded according to the ages of the members and their families.

But when it comes to the matter of expressional activity of any