Elder Maxwell And "Eternalism vs. Secularism"

"The fundamental contrast between eternalism and secularism lies in their approaches to problem-solving." - Neal A. Maxwell

About a year ago, I did a podcast covering one of the most prophetic talks that has been given in the past several decades.

It was given by Elder Neal A. Maxwell nearly 50 years ago but is perhaps more applicable today than when he first gave it. This talk should be considered THE anchor reference for anyone trying to navigate the waters of Critical Race Theory, Critical Social Justice, and Identitarianism in our rapidly changing culture and institutions. Likewise, everyone who is trying to understand how to follow the First Presidency's charge best to "root out racism" should make sure that their actions still align with Elder Maxwell’s guidelines. They work in tandem.

In Elder Maxwell's talk, he highlights the distinctions between two competing schools of thought, which he termed “eternalism” and “secularism”. Eternalism can be seen as the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and Secularism as the Religion of Academia. He defines Eternalism as a perspective centered on Heavenly Father, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost, who have devised a redeeming plan for mankind. At the same time, Secularism was described as an irreligious perspective that disregards the existence of God and the cosmic purpose of the role of humanity.

It is telling that his day's primary egalitarian and "equity" ideology was the global spread of Communism/Socialism. Yet he could have written this article today as it applies directly to the Social Justice movement and Religion of Academia.

Why?

Because they are ALL rooted in the same Marxian tenets, they act the same, have the same goals, and will ultimately have the same results. They are anti-freedom, anti-family, and anti-Christ.

However, its important to note that people can adhere to Social Justice without embracing (at least internally) all of those Marxian tenants. Elder Maxwell even began by acknowledging that sincere secularism should not be condemned, quoting the Savior's own words: "For he that is not against us is on our part" (Mark 9:40).

Instead, he highlighted the shortfalls of secularism in addressing problems affecting humanity's true, long-term well-being.

He describes how random and misguided efforts, though well-intentioned, often prove ineffective or even result in counterproductive results. Solutions that, on paper, appear to be helpful can eventually lead to unintended consequences. Secular attempts at wealth redistribution and poverty alleviation have historically fallen short. Human systems struggle to tackle these challenges, effectively leading to persistent economic disparities.

The flaws in public welfare programs perfectly evidence this. Thomas Sowell observed, "A vastly expanded welfare state in the 1960s destroyed the black family, which had survived centuries of slavery and generations of racial oppression.”

In contrast, eternalism focuses on values and behaviors that promote the enlightened use of wealth and dissolve the boundaries between rich and poor through righteousness and Christian principles. The City of Enoch, the early Christian communities, and the period in ancient America are remarkable instances where the lines between rich and poor were eradicated through an individual commitment to the Doctrine of Christ.

The fundamental contrast between eternalism and secularism lies in their approaches to problem-solving. Eternalism places the individual as its core focus and emphasizes teaching correct principles, allowing for true individual growth and subsequent positive impacts on society.

Conversely, secularism tends to rely on changing (often dismantling) systems, governments, and external entities, hoping that changing external circumstances will transform individuals internally. Sound familiar?

Today, Critical Social Justice removes self-responsibility and individual growth by saying, "You be you," and the all too common propaganda today states that we should "affirm" who one is and not be concerned about who one could become. The principle of Critical Theory, a Marxist tenet, is that "the problem is out there" and not within ourselves.

Thie idea, known as “expressive individualism,” equates love with advocacy, and I’ll delve deeper into this concept in a future newsletter.

Elder Maxwell wisely warns that intemperate minds cannot be free by highlighting the need for self-restraint and self-discipline as the basis for true freedom. As Jocko Wilink says, “Discipline equals freedom.”

I go into much more detail on this talk on my podcast, which you can watch HERE.

Click HERE for Elder Maxwell's incredible talk.

Best,

Greg Matsen