So I've read some of my cousin's blog. She's Southern Baptist and when she talks about sin, she refers to herself as being "unworthy" and "sinful" and whatnot. She's not my only Protestant friend that talks this way. Many Protestants do. It's always bothered me and I couldn't put my finger on it until I came across a Vortex episode about Amazing Grace. Then I got it. I was never raised to think of myself as being evil.
Protestants believe that the soul is evil. Okay, I should be more specific. They believe that human's are inherently sinful and human nature is evil. Catholics don't believe this at all. God designed us and he made us good, not evil. In particular, God and God alone makes our souls. Then original sin came along and our souls were bruised or lacerated, but certainly not made evil. Baptism is the balm that spread on the bruise/laceration to heal the stain of original sin. Our term is Concupiscence. Basically it means that our souls are good, but we are prone to sin. The CCC defines it as this:
1264: Yet certain temporal consequences of sin remain in the baptized, such as suffering, illness, death, and such frailties inherent in life as weaknesses of character, and so on, as well as an inclination to sin that Tradition calls concupiscence, or metaphorically, "the tinder for sin" (fomes peccati); since concupiscence "is left for us to wrestle with, it cannot harm those who do not consent but manfully resist it by the grace of Jesus Christ."...
Therefore, Catholics believe that people aren't evil just prone to sin; easily duped by the devil. This is especially true if we've committed a sin and have not sought forgiveness for it. Just like when the body contracts a cold that turns into the flu or pneumonia, when we sin our soul's "immune system" is weak and more prone to the whispers of the devil. We're more likely to keep "contracting" more sin.
Sin, from the Catholic viewpoint, doesn't make a person evil, but rather the sin itself is evil. To sin is a conscientious turning away from God's commands. Granted there are venial sins, which I think of as your conscience or Jimmy Cricket. For example, you may not know that it's wrong to steal because nobody has taught you that (in the case of a child perhaps) yet something inside you tells you that it's wrong. This nagging feeling is what you get when you commit an otherwise mortal sin if you didn't fully know that it was wrong. Again, that doesn't make you evil, it just means God is speaking to you and you aren't listening.
Protestants, however, don't need any kind of a nagging feeling. They believe that people are by their very nature sinful and will commit sin without realizing it. In the Protestant view, you don't have to deliberately plug up your ears and say "na na na, not listening to you." You're going to sin no matter what because you are born that way. And therefore, people are "sinful," "evil", "wretches."
That's why I think many of my Protestant friends use the type of language of being a "wretch" and "evil." And Catholics, like myself, don't understand why. I certainly never referred to myself as being evil or a wretch. I know God loves me and made me in a way to serve him with all the best possible bits he could muster. He would not set me up to be evil. He sets me up to do good and his will. It's my choice to do something evil or wrong, but that doesn't make me evil. That would be a slap in the face of my Lord, who has created and intended me to be good.
Another place where we diverge is Biblical interpretation. Catholics can't interpret the Bible on their own. Okay, again need to be more specific. Catholics can read a passage and also based on church Tradition conclude that they (as females) need to cover their heads at Mass (for example). However, unless the Pope issues a statement about it being mandatory to do so, Catholics cannot conclude that all Catholic women need to cover their heads. Nor can it go the other way, Catholics can't conclude that Catholic women shouldn't cover their heads unless the Pope says so. Therefore, it's a personal choice on how to interpret 1 Cor. until the Pope has said one way or the other.
Much about the Bible is like this, but much of the Bible is not up for debate either. The passages I quoted in my post about confession are not up for debate. A Catholic cannot interpret them any other way; a Protestant can. If a Catholic did, we would not be Catholic. We would be as Michael Voris put it, "Un-official Protestants." And as one of my friends says, "If you're Protestant you go find a church that believes what you do. If you're Catholic and you don't agree with a Church stance, then you still stay Catholic but ignore it." Again, I don't recommend doing that. But I would recommend excommunicating yourself. A small side note: it really upsets, eats at me, etc when I know a person who disagrees with something in the Church that's big (such as Confession) goes and receives communion anyway. Please don't do this. Even if you don't think it's sinful, it's still hurtful against the rest of us Catholics. (And I hope that someone I know in real life gets the hint.)
Below is the video I was speaking about. For my Protestant friends and family, let me be frank. Voris is a proselytizer, but his audience is to wayward Catholics. I agree with his views, BUT, and this is a big but, I would not use the language he does. For one thing, he fails to realize the positive affect Martin Luther had on the Church. I would not label Luther as a saint, but his take on indulgences did spearhead the Counter-Reformation. I've heard worse from Protestants, but in all fairness, a line has to be drawn in the sand if we're to have any dialogue. And sorry, Mom, I know Amazing Grace if your favorite, but I won't be performing it at your funeral. Maybe C will be kind enough to find another willing musician.