Critical analysis of Tomáš Halík's "Afternoon of Christianity"

Msgr. Prof. Tomáš Halík PhD, DD. is well known Czech theologian and priest. He is also strong supporter and promoter of modern theology. His talk by name "Afternoon of Christianity" is quite telling insight into present day insanity of Catholic intellectuals including not only himself, but very high-ranking clerics. You can watch his talk on the Youtube. It is about 30 minutes long and quite disturbing. I am going to address some key points of his talk.

1. Distorted view of history and relation of Christianity (Catholicism) and Enlightenment (secularism, liberalism, etc.)

First misconception of Msgr. Halík is that enlightenment is (natural) product of Christianity, a product of conflict between Catholics and Protestants. It is not. It is primarily a natural product or lets say consequence of Protestantism. It is important to make distinction between authentic Christianity - Catholic - and fake distorted Christianity - Protestantism. Those are not equals. It is not competition between two equals. It is no wonder that secularism has its origin in philosophies coming from protestant England, which influenced both French and American revolution. The idea of secularism as promoted by John Locke was intended only for coexistence (tolerance) of solely protestant sects. The Catholics (vulgarly referenced as Papists) and atheist or other religions had no right to exists in this system. Therefore as Protestantism started slow downfall (crumbling and watering down) of Christianity and enabled deism (first step towards agnosticism and atheism), then atheistic spin on secularism denoted the start of the end of the Christianity and Christianity guided civilization.
His other misconception is that current society adopted/absorbed and internalized christian ways. No. It rather runs on the trend of Christian civilization. However this trend fades off  with increasing speed.

2. Christians (incl. Catholics) need secularism and vice verse to serve as corrective measure

If Christ brought all necessary means for Salvation including his Church. We do not need an external principle, which is not part of his mandate or revelation, as corrective measure. It is dualism. Like saying the evil is necessary for the existence of good. It is not catholic.

3. The Christianity (especially Catholic Church) must search for new role in the secular world.

The mandate of Church is clear for all times Mathew 28:19-20: Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.
The idea of the Church in need to change her role in the World just because it became secular and pagan is modern nonsense. It is just cleverly disguised way of saying that "the Church must go with the times", which is old modernist battle cry as they demolish the Church.

4. The Church that must die in order to bear fruits

It is an insane extrapolation of the idea of individual Christian sacrificing his life for the faith in order to bear fruits for the Christ. If the Church as whole is destroyed, if it dies as a tree it can not bear the fruits anymore. Is this why modern theologians are on mission to destroy the Church?

5. The problem of "triumphalism"

Firstly Msgr. Halík reduces the role of Church militant to private spiritual struggle and overlooks the other dimension of the struggle. The struggle to evangelize according to the mandate of the Church (applicable both on individual Catholics and the Church as whole) to spread the faith. After all it is the One True Faith for salvation of all man.
Then he accuses Catholics in the Church militant to suffer from self-identification with the Church triumphant. According to him this lead to militant attitude towards others, who are "different" (meaning other religions, heretics outside and inside church). Like if Catholics were committing terrorist acts and suicide bombings against those people. This accusation is directed towards traditionalists, tradition minded and orthodox Catholics.
This accusation is false. Those Catholics have in mind also the Church triumphant, but they do not self identify with it nor interchange the Church militant with the Church triumphant.
What Msgr. Halík completly overlooks is fact that the Church triumphant is a part of the whole Church. It is nothing wrong to love the Catholic Church and be proud of its God given glory, splendor and beauty. It is like loving creation (nature) as expression of overflowing love for its creator (God), then why wouldn't you love the gem of creation the bride of the Christ and despised all cheap man made fakes and imitations.
It is important to note that the Gospel and its main message itself is utmost triumphalist message of all times. The message that the Jesus Christ has risen. The victory over death. It can't get more "triumphalist"!
His idea also denies the reality of the saints, who loved the God and his Church, while being humble about their own personal deeds.
He also ipso facto denies the Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus (there is no salvation outside the Church).

He presents erroneous idea that the individual believer has no access to the sufficient knowledge of God, because he overlooks the fact that the Church has/provides all necessary means for salvation. This erroneous thinking leads him to the idea that believers and consequently the Church itself must look for ways to improve its understanding of God. This he backs by misinterpretation of the St. Paul, where St. Paul speaks about how we see God in the afterlife in contrast to this life.
Moreover he beliefs erroneously there are other legitimate ways of being Christian, than being a Catholic, than being a member of Christ's Church or any other ecclesiastical community whatsoever.

He presents a false humility in erroneous endless doubt as part of the Christian life, because he does not direct those on believer himself, but on the God and truths of the Faith. What would Msgr. Halík say on words of St. Alphonsus:

If you are tempted by the evil spirit against some truth of our holy faith do not stop to consider the difficulties suggested by the devil, but make an act of faith without delay and protest before God your willingness to lay down your very life for the truths of your holy faith. 
Liguori, St. Alphonsus. The Twelve Steps to Holiness and Salvation

6. The third path

The third path for the Church, as it is promulgated not only by Msgr. Halík, but sadly in some other forms by many high ranking bishops and even by the pope Francis, is equivalent of the fifth wheel of the cart.
What it is? The idea of "accompanying people". He speaks of two traditional ways pastoral and missionary. The pastoral is directed towards members of the Church and the missionary is to bring people outside the Church in. However what about the third way (accompanying people)? If the pastoral and missionary care of the Church cover all people (inside and outside the Church), for whom is it good for? It is utterly useless and superfluous construct.
What does it even mean "accompanying people"? Accompanying where to? On road to the Hell (on road different than path to the salvation)? Doesn't it lead the accompanying christian to the Hell too?
Msgr. Halik is more precise. He does speak about accompanying of "seekers". Those are people who are endlessly "seeking God", but can not find him. However we do not send "missionaries" to them. No, no! According to Msgr. Halík quote: "we accompany them on their path in dialogue for a while". and then ...
I don't know we ditch them? "This should be considered of equal value as missionary work" according to him. Seriously!? Yes, Msgr. Halík does realize the fact quote: "it requires a radical shift in the ecclesiology".

The ultimate Goal of neo-modernists

The plan for the future of the Church is according to Msgr. Halík alliance between (anti-christian) secularism and all Christians as they are coming to terms with one another via the ecumenical efforts. This plan of course includes keeping the secularism at the helm guiding them as they became increasingly immersed in pluralistic world and themselves become more pluralistic. "Other ways of being a christian will emerge".

What is therefore the idea of "Afternoon Christianity". It is the idea of revitalized new Christianity transformed by modern ideology, "pluralized", with a new role after present "noon crisis".

I can agree that Christianity is in period of crisis, but this is not "middle-age crisis". It is rather a period of illness when the body of the Christ is weakened. Before it can function effectively again the disease must be fight off by its immunity system. However what if Church at present suffers from some form of an autoimmune disease. Only miracle could save the Church in such case.