Brother Van Winkle Returns
By Davis Bitton

What, in a religion, is essential and what is non-essential? What might change and what may not, or should not, change? The question has been around for a long time.

In the sixteenth century, as the unity of Christendom (it had never been as totally unified as it liked to pretend) was shattered by the Protestant rebellion and the subsequent appearance of different varieties of Protestantism, feelings ran high and reciprocal anathemas were hurled across the confessional lines.

A moderate Catholic, Erasmus of Rotterdam, sought to calm things down. Mercy, kindness, charity, willingness to grant good motives to others ― these were his guidelines. Specifically, as we find in several of his colloquies, Erasmus wished to emphasize agreement on the great principles of Christian faith while allowing for differences on matters that were not vital.

In the following century, Rupert Meldenius, Gregor Frank, and Richard Baxter among others summarized the Erasmian tradition in the following aphorism: "Unity in essentials, liberty in non-essentials, charity in all." It was a noble statement.

The trouble was that people could seldom agree on what was and was not essential. Should there be organ music in church? Zwingli thought not. Should there be steeples on chapels? Could the sacrament of the Lord's Supper be celebrated without believing in transubstantiation as it had been technically defined by theologians? And on and on.

Mormonism could not exist in the flow of time without sooner or later confronting the same question. Every time something new was added, someone would complain. Or so it seemed. The publication of the Doctrine and Covenants in 1835 caused great distress to those who wanted the smaller Book of Commandments (1833) to be the final word. And everyone knows of those critics and apostates who found unacceptable the Prophet's amplification of understanding and practice at Nauvoo.

A Visitor from the Past

Imagine the following dialogue:

"We have as our guest this evening someone totally unexpected. This is quite incredible! I know our audience will never forget this evening. Thank you for joining is Brother Heber Q. Van Winkle."

"I am glad to be here."

"Brothers and sisters, Brother Van Winkle fell asleep in a sacrament meeting back in 1875. He just woke up."

"Yes, I have a lot of catching up to do. When I fell asleep Brigham Young was president of the Church, and Ulysses S. Grant, an enemy of our people, was president of the country. I have already noticed the great changes in speed of transport. I was brought to this meeting in a wagon ― or some kind of vehicle ― that required no horses to pull it. I see winged vessels flying in the sky and have been told that people can cross the country in them. It is certainly good to find the Church still here."

"Oh, yes, of course the Church is still here. You expected it to stay on earth until the Second Coming, and so do we."

"I am a little surprised that the Second Coming has not yet occurred. Many of us expected it in our lifetime. But then we did say that no one really knew the hour or the day, and it would come as a thief in the night. I suppose that is still being taught."

"Quite so, Brother Van Winkle. Would you like to attend sacrament meeting next Sunday? Our speaker is Sister Helen Robinson, who will tell about her mission to Nigeria."

"What! A woman elder? That's something I never expected to see. And isn't Nigeria in Africa? I assume the missionaries there must be preaching the gospel to the British officials and certainly not to Negroes."

"You do have a lot to learn, Brother Van Winkle. They are not elders, but we now have thousands of sister missionaries in the field. They also go out two by two and are considered a great asset in every mission of the Church. It may surprise you to know that Great Britain granted independence to practically all parts of its extensive empire. Nigeria is a sovereign nation. And we do preach to native Africans.

"They are a great people, very open to the Spirit of the Lord. With few exceptions those who join the Church are beautifully faithful members. I think I'll let you try to digest that before I go on to explain the revelation on the Priesthood."

"I'm feeling just a little dizzy. At least I'm sure you still hold fast and testimony meeting every Thursday night. I hope to be able to attend and even bear my own testimony."

"You are certainly welcome to attend that meeting. We hold it once a month, but now it is on a Sunday. By the way, we have a block schedule that may take some getting used to. It lasts for three hours, during which Priesthood and Relief Society meeting, Sunday School, and sacrament meeting are all held. And I probably need to explain to you a few things about the role of Seventies, our Area presidencies, the location of our current temples, and ― what's this! Brother Van Winkle!

Brother Van Winkle! Are you all right? Brothers and Sisters, it appears that our visitor from the past has drifted off to sleep once again."

Non-Essential Changes

How do we know these changes are in the area of non-essentials?

Should I not insist that if Mutual was held on Tuesday evening at 7:30 p.m., as it was during my youth, it must always be scheduled at that time? Or if returning missionaries reported to a General Authority, as they did when I came back from France many years ago, must not that exact procedure be continued?

I choose to think as follows. The Lord restored His Church in these latter days. He would not do that in order to see it fail. He has said as much. One of its great strengths is continuous revelation. We can change meeting times. We have no reluctance to incorporate the latest technology in administration of finances and the keeping of records.

As for the Church organization, it has demonstrated its inspiration by being wondrously flexible in expanding to administer areas throughout the world. The core truths and Priesthood authority ― the essentials ―- are unaffected.

The Lord has declared his work and glory to be bringing to pass the immortality and eternal life of his children. The mission of the Church on earth is the same. That doesn't change and will never change. But if changes in the mechanism and emphasis occur with the passing generations, why should we be surprised?

Using the distinction made at the beginning of this column, I have called certain things "nonessentials," meaning they are subject to change without altering the fundamentals of the restoration. Meeting times, ages of ordination, specific auxiliary programs, ages of missionaries ― the list could go on and on. But that is not to say that we pick and choose. Loyalty to the current leaders is not a minor matter.

One of the themes often repeated by missionaries from the beginning of the restoration was the inadequacy of revelations in previous ages to meet today's challenges. Hence the need for a modern prophet. The Church is built "upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone" (Eph. 2:20). That too will never change.

If Brother Van Winkle had been able to stay awake and had the necessary time to adjust, I think he too would rejoice in the onward march of the Church. He would join us in singing, "We thank thee, O God, for a prophet to guide us in these latter days."