over the excitement redoubled. The score was 26-19 in favor of 1906. The winning team was carried in triumph around the room, as was also the freshmen team, and the wild shouting and singing lasted for quite a while after the game was over. Finally all the classes joined in singing the new college song, and then went home. Everyone left the "gym" feeling that there had never been a nicer game or better spirit shown.

The fouls made during the game and the score in detail were as follows:

A departure from the traditional, if it succeeds, is to be doubly praised, and the Haven House, in its presentation of a play as out of the ordinary as "Alice in Wonderland", has succeeded.

Haven House Play

The costuming, perhaps the most important feature of the play, was admirable, and the setting was in accordance with it. The scenery and costumes together produced most telling effects-impressive as a whole, ingenious and satisfactory in detail. Not once did the curtain rise on a new scene without a burst of applause from the audience.

The parts were all well taken. The birds and animals in the first scene were good, the mouse especially so. Tweedledum and Tweedledee were very attractive. The caterpillar's part was made interesting and was sustained by good by-play. Humpty Dumpty was excellent; force of circumstances not permitting much change of expression as to countenance, he made maniffest his emotions by a very expressive use of legs and feet. In the mad tea party the hatter and dormouse acted especially well. One of the best characters in the play was the mock-turtle, whose sad voice and solos were creative of much sympathetic laughter. Alice was good throughout; some of her gestures and little motions were childlike and amusing, yet the part could have been made more interesting had she been more frightened, more joyful, more individual. Careful training rather than individual acting was manifested in various characters. The effectiveness of the Queen of Hearts depended entirely upon one gesture, and the King failed to make the impression that his lines would have warranted.

The grouping was always good; there were exceedingly few of the dull spots which make a play drag, and the cast and committee deserve hearty congratulations upon the success of their undertaking. The cast was as follows:

Manager, Florence Lord; Chairman of Costume Committee, Lora Wright; Chairman of Scenery Committee, Louise Kingsley.

The junior frolic was held in the Alumnæ Gymnasium Saturday evening, March 12.

CALENDAR

Apr. 19, Song Recital by Mr. David Bispham.

20,

22,

Lawrence House Dance.

Open Meeting of the Mathematics Club. Lecture by
Prof. Gale of Yale University. Subject: The Rôle
of Transformation in Modern Geometry.

23, Annual Business Meeting of the S. C. A. C. W.
23, Alpha Society.

26, Lecture by Prof. Hopkins of Yale University. Sub

ject The Hindoo Drama.

27, Concert by the Boston Symphony Orchestra.

30, Phi Kappa Psi Society.

May 4, Joint Play of Alpha and Phi Kappa Psi Societies.

11, Junior Promenade.

14, Alpha Society.

Some Issues in regard to the Proposed Reunion of the Anglican and Russo-Greek Churches

We are all familiar with the saying which tells us with so much assurance that there is nothing really new, that things. seemingly the newest are but fresh forms of older truths, ideas and questions, in a different dress perhaps, but animated by a world-old spirit. So this discussion of the possibilities of reunion between the Russo-Greek and Anglican churches has behind it the innumerable prayers for unity of the whole church and the increasing sense among all Christian people of the harmfulness of division, one expression of which is the collect, "For the Unity of God's People", added to the Prayer Book in the revision of 1892. But the question even in its present form is not a new one, for as long ago as 1862 the General Convention appointed a joint committee "to consider the expediency of opening communication with the Russo-Greek church and to collect authentic information bearing upon the subject", and reports were made in 1865 and 1868, the latter, which was "extended, hopeful, and very sympathetic," being signed by five bishops of the American church. The proposals then, like the

ones we are about to consider and which are, in their present form, only a few weeks old, were entirely academic. No immediate action is now expected or indeed wished for by those who have the cause of reunion most at heart, but a fair examination of the points at issue by the clergy and people of the churches involved is much to be desired before any further steps are taken towards a practical result. This consideration of a purely academic question is the very thing that it is difficult to get people, particularly Americans, to attend to, for as Matthew Arnold says, "The mass of mankind will always treat lightly even things the most venerable if they do not present themselves as visible before its eyes."

The academic nature of the proposals involved in the present question is shown by the fact that the advances on both sides were unofficial. Bishop Grafton on his late visit to Moscow bore no formal commission from the American church, and the expressions of the Russian ecclesiastics, while very friendly and energetic, were not made as final and authorized statements of the Russo-Greek church. It is reported, however, that a special commission, consisting of three members and a president to consider questions in regard to the union of the Russo-Greek and Anglican churches has been officially formed by the Holy Synod. This, if true, may lead to more definite action, but hardly in the near future.

Another fact that must keep the question of reunion for a long time entirely academic is the degree of difference between the position taken by the theologians in either Russia or America and that assumed by a majority of the people, who cannot be considered thoroughly educated along theological lines, however jealous they may be for what they hold as the belief of their church. A certain number of Christian people anywhere are ill-informed as to the true theological position of their religious body and the logical results which would follow from that position, and this difference between theologians and people is seen not less where the latter are educated and enlightened along other lines of thought than where they are superstitious and illiterate. Thus many popular Roman beliefs are neither authorized or defended by Roman Catholic theologians as, for instance, the worship sometimes paid to pictures or statues or to the persons of saints. This is contrary to the doctrine of the Roman Catholic church, which says that veneration in its highest

form or what is generally called "worship" can be paid to God alone but that honor is due to the saints and in a lesser degree to representatives of them and to things used in the service of the church. Again the idea often held by ignorant Roman Catholics that the repetition of certain prayers is of value apart from the spirit with which they are said is plainly contradicted in the teachings on the Mass which distinctly state that the disposition of the soul is the essential thing and "without these (right dispositions) all outward worship is unprofitable and vain." So in the Anglican church there is a great difference between the written theology of its ecclesiastics and much generally received by its people. Many calling themselves Anglicans do not accept the authority of the church, though the statement that the church possesses authority is made in the Articles, and the unique character of the priesthood as compared with Protestant clergymen is very often overlooked in spite of the teaching of the Anglican church concerning their sacred functions. With Protestant bodies the condition is much the same for almost anywhere it is possible to find people holding views distinctly opposed to those taught by the religious organization to which they belong. This is often seen to be the case with Calvinists, many of whom do not hold or seem to be acquainted with certain distinctively Calvinistic doctrines though they consider themselves members of that body. This difference between people and teaching makes any union on exclusively theological grounds extremely unwise, and a campaign of instruction leading to greater sympathy between the people in both Russia and America would have to go before and prepare the way for any practical action on the part of authorities in both churches.

The conditions which are, so far as can be seen now, favorable to ultimate unity between Anglicans and Greeks are the bonds of sympathy which draw them together as opposed to Romanists and Protestants and the actual points of likeness in doctrine which they possess. The Eastern branch of the Catholic church has, of course, unceasingly protested against the presumption of the Latins in the West in claiming supremacy over the whole church and the fact that there is in the West a branch of the church holding ancient tradition and belief, but objecting to the claim of supremacy by one part over the others, is in itself a powerful reason with the Greeks for wishing to reunite with