True, and included in this is the gospel of grace thru merit, meaning that by the grace of God believers are justified because God has (magically) infused charity into their heart via the very act of baptism, (ex opere operato) even to an infant, who cannot obey the stated requirements for baptism. (Acts 2:38; 8:36,37) Thus it is held that if the newly converted died before they sinned then they could go directly to God in Heaven. But since - despite the claim of actual obliteration of sin by the very act of baptism - the sin nature is alive and well, and has its outworking, then unless the soul attains to and dies in the rare state of being good enough in character to enter Heaven, including free from any attachment to sin, then the Catholic must endure purifying torments commencing at death, which Scripture nowhere teaches for the believer, as many times shown here at length.
And this is one reason for the stubborn refusal of evangelical Protestants to even consider that they might be wrong. "Our religion is different; it's the only one to realize G-d is to holy to be pleased, so we can only be saved by a legal loophole." And who wants to spend an entire lifetime walking a tightrope over the yawning maw of Hell (which is basically what all the other religions do)?
Evangelical Protestants insist that if G-d were to merely forgive sin he would "topple from His throne of holiness." He can't simply forgive a sin. His very nature demands that it must be punished, and punished only by eternal damnation . . . even if the punishment is placed on an innocent third party. I don't think Evangelicals would even respect a G-d Who could forgive sin without "eternally damning" it after imputing it to someone else. When your whole view of G-d depends on something you're not going to question it.
And actually, this makes sense. Why would G-d "supersede" the Law of Moses (a ritual, legal, ethical system) with another ritual, legal, ethical system? If G-d could be placated by a ritual, legal, and ethical system we already had one, and one from Heaven at that (disputed by no one). To insist the whole point of the Torah was to eventually replace it with "something just like it only different" simply makes no sense.
My attacks on the fairy tale of an ancient Protestant church is not intended as a defense of the ancient traditionalist churches. It is mean to show that neither form of chrstianity makes any sense and that what was once the true religion (Judaism) is still the true religion. And by the way, G-d does demand atonement for sins, and He provides the ways to do it (which have never been replaced).
::Sigh:: Why do these people continue to pretend the Roman Catholic Church is the only traditionalist church out there and ignore the Ethiopians, the Armenians, the St. Thomas chrstians of India, the Assyrians, the Copts, etc.? Pretending these don't exist just so you can pretend that it all started with Constantine is dishonest.