For example, I can't see Mother Teresa approaching the pearly gates and being told by St. Peter to check into the other place because the doctrine of transubstantiation is wrong because the sacrament is only symbolic, not literal.
Rome's caricature of heaven aside, Mother Teresa engaged in good old fashioned works-righteousness, a tenet of all pseudo-religions that estimates that one's works will somehow appease the gods. And she was a practical polytheist in that she sincerely believed in a Many Paths, One God soteriology. Her statements are pretty clear that she rejected Jesus Christ being the only way to salvation and she totally supported sincerity in any faith (whether it is Hindu, Muslim or Voodoo, as long as the believer is sincere). Now she did subscribe to a hodge-podge of Roman beliefs, and perhaps she may have believed in a real Jesus Christ, but she is also well known for pointing to the "least of these" and believing that they individually were Jesus Christ, sort of a wierd semi-pantheistic spirit blend theology. One thing is for certain, she rejected orthodox doctrines of Christianity. Her missions had nothing to do with salvation, it was very much a ministry of service.
Nor can I see St. Peter admitting some murdering scumbag into heaven because at one time in his life, he signed the acceptance of Jesus Christ statement in the back of a Gideon New Testament and sincerely meant it.
So St. Paul didn't make it to heaven for even he called himself the "chief of all sinners"; part of his résumé included the serial murder of Christians.
Thankfully, we don't have to rely on the heresies and blasphemies that have characterized Rome, rather we have the Scriptures and many generations of devout theologians including men of God such as Thomas Aquinas, who have debated extensively on every point of doctrine in the Bible and have left us their notes so that we can have a more comprehensive understanding of God.
As part of that heritage, we have a very mature understanding of the Doctrines of Grace that rely on the Grace of God through His Election according to His Purpose rather than relying on the moral relativity and subjectivity of fallen and corrupted man.
The Gospel Matthew 25:31-46 is what she had stated she was thinking of; she trained herself to see Christ in "the least of these." That may not make sense to everyone, but it makes eminent sense to me.
I don't set myself up as the judge of St. Paul or anyone else, for that matter. I simply make the observation that a man can turn from murder to being the greatest missionary for Christ in history (in the case of St. Paul) just as one can turn from being a sincere confessor of Christ to murder. It is a huge difference which, evidently, is a moral equivalent in your mind.
Not unlike the political liberals who want to be judged for their good intentions rather than their actual results.