Catholic Critiques of Calvinism

Did you reply to the wrong person? Nothing you said makes any sense as a response to anything I said except maybe the first sentence, but it sounds like you're implying that's what I'm saying, which would be absurd.

You said this part was proper.
For the second part, I am concurring that good deeds do not equal salvation, then I continue on to say you still have a problem with knowing whether you are saved or not, PLUS whether you will lose your faith.
Saying we can lose our salvations means Jesus died for us, but he didn't really, because he doesn't carry all of our sins. Does he still cover the sins while we were saved? Or are we still punished for them.
We are not able to get to God due to total depravity and original sin. It is God who comes to us.

You said "So we were justified before we had faith", there's no not in there.
I don't believe Jesus loses any of His sheep.
Reading comprehension 200%? I was pointing out flaws in a false doctrine of assurance

Replying about certainty of salvation.

I agree that the basis of one's hope of salvation should be in Christ. That's not the point. In the Catholic view, Christ paid for the sins of the whole world. Forgiveness is offered to all through through the sacraments. In Calvinism, Christ died only for the elect. A Catholic can look back to their baptism and know that even if they will fall away later, they really received the gift of God's grace in baptism. A Calvinist can look back to their conversion and make a prudent judgment, but he cannot know with certainty whether he really receieved any grace at all, or whether he just receieved the kind of counterfeit grace that Calvin says God gives to damn you harder later. Maybe this does not seem like a big deal to you but it is to a lot of people, including many Protestants.

The Catholic view is not self-reliant. Sacraments are not things that we do to earn God's favor. They're objective signs of God's grace established by God. This idea is not unique to Catholics. You are right that a Catholic may be delusional, but you're exaggerating how much so. First of all Catholics, believe on a distinction between mortal and venial sin. It is very possible for a Catholic to avoid all mortal sin. Even if you do die on the way to confession after commiting a mortal sin (which merits famnation anyway, so serves you right), the Catholic teaching is that so-called "perfect contrition" with intention of confessing your sin is sufficient for forgiveness. If you make a confession and you omit some sin by forgetfulness, assuming you repented from it, it is still forgiven in the sacrament. You could have the example of the unrepentant sodomite who tells themself their sin is not a sin and goes to confession, and of course their sin is not forgiven because they are insincere. But for a normal person who heeds the moral teaching of the church and is sincere, they just go to confession and receive the forgiveness of sins, free and easy. People make it out as if Catholicism makes salvation nearly impossible, but the reality is not like that at all.

And practically speaking, there's not much difference in terms of human effort between Calvinism and Catholicism. They differ in explanations of what's going on behind the scenes, but both systems teach that God will guide the predestinate to do those things that are associated with the life of grace and to avoid sin.

You don't know how rare it is. No one but God knows. I don't get the impression Calvin thought it was as rare as you suggest.

No, that is contrary to Catholic dogma. Any Catholic that believes that is either misinformed or not a Catholic at all.

If you read the book I recommended to OP earlier, Predestination by Regonald Garrigou-Lagrange, he talks about this topic. For example, he writes about the distinction between predestination to grace and predestination to heaven (I don't think that's the exact term he uses). The second class is smaller than the first. Catholics believe that not everyone who is predestined to grace is predestined to persevere to their death. Some will fall away. That does not mean that they were never "saved" (never received real grace). An analogy could be people (sinners) drowning in the ocean. A ship comes and saves some by hauling them aboard. Some stay on the ship all the way to dry land. Some, through their own carelesness fall back into the water and drown. Some who fall back in are hauled back on board (even multiple times), but end up making it back on the ship to land.

Yes, that is part of the problem. Christ failed to achieve salvation, so we are left to fill in the blanks. We are made the masters of our own salvation, and I think that has serious ramifications for one's assurance. If I thought my ultimate fate was up to me, I'd give up, the only thing I'd have confidence in is my own damnation.
Is that supposed to be a consolation? 'I can be damned to hell forever, but at least I was temporarily imperfectly right with God once'? I think that's something that ought to give greater fear, since it means they sin against greater light and incur a greater judgement.
They shouldn't be looking back to their conversion for assurance. There are multiple sources from which they may derive assurance, but that is not one.
First of all, there is the simple, plain, biblical teaching that assurance is a special grace of God which believers normally receive (Romans 8:15-17). One may derive their assurance from their ongoing faith in Christ, inasmuch as Christ promises to them salvation, and His promise is sure. But I also believe it is consistent with scripture and with the Reformed tradition to say that a believer may derive their confidence of their eternal salvation from the promises of God given in their baptism.
He can know with certainty that he possesses true faith if he knows his own heart. The delusions of false believers do not change this. Lunatics cannot tell they are insane, this does not mean the sane cannot tell with certainty they are sane.
I'm well aware, but you must also be aware their efficacy is dependent on our cooperation.
I have complete confidence that if a Catholic believes he has a good chance of going to heaven he is suffering a delusion.

I know, they have to, if your church taught the biblical standard of holiness the jig would be up. But the fact this false distinction is introduced to justify the false gospel doesn't change the fact the bible teaches us God is so holy He cannot tolerate even a hint of sin (Revelation 21:27, James 2:10, etc).
The loopholes like this and "baptism of desire" are inconsistent not only with the same biblical standard I just spoke of but also with mere common sense. Does God require your confession? Then He requires your confession. It doesn't matter how sincere your attempt to achieve God's standard was, it doesn't matter how close you came, if that is truly God's standard, too bad for you. I find it hard to understand how someone can believe in these loopholes except from a desire to cheat God should they get caught in such circumstances.
Catholicism make salvation impossible because it requires us to put in the effort. Our assurance is derived from the very fact it is not us who accomplish our salvation. We don't have to give it our all because we rely on one who already performed all righteousness. I'll repeat this, because it's important: Our assurance is derived from the very fact it is not us who accomplish our salvation. This is why we don't have a problem about our assurance in eternal salvation, but Roman Catholics do.
That is incredibly naive. I think practically speaking there is a massive difference between us. Sure, we're both going to have a drive to do good works, but that is not the extent of practicality. Just as one example, a Calvinist is going to feel at peace, and their attitude toward God will be one of gratitude, a Roman Catholic is going to feel panicked, and their attitude toward God will be one of fear (keep in mind I am talking about consistent exemplars, so please don't reply with anecdotes).
Obviously I was giving an anecdote, not making a universal claim as if I thought myself omniscient.

No. Man can fail to accept Salvation by not accepting Christ. Avoiding the Mortal Sin and attending to the Eucharist is there to satisfy the "He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath everlasting life: and I will raise him up in the last day."

If you have a problem with this, let me remind you, so did the disciples that left Him.

Yes, Baptism leaves an indelible mark of the Holy Spirit on the soul. Even if you leave the Church, you are still marked as a sheep of Christ, and still have an innate resistance to evil. However, it will be worse for you to know the Way, and to turn back away.

He can know with certainty if he keeps the Lord's commandments.

Then take it up with Jesus, we keep his commandments, and we eat of His Body and His Blood, as He commanded us to do.

Which is? We've kept the battle up against masturbation, pornography, divorce, and birth control, what Protestant sect are you from that has carried the torch here?

You find it hard because you will not listen to what He asked of us. We do not confess our sins for our pleasure, we do it out of love and fear of God, Jesus Christ. We believe that someone with a *genuine* internal drive for confession/repentance can receive it because we believe God has made the decision to call them out of this life before they can. The Sacraments are not merely rituals, they are suffused with the Holy Spirit, which is God.

Oi, sounds like you're accusing Christ here. He is the narrow way.

Your assurance is derived out of reading Scripture without accepting any particular apostolic authority, pure and simple.

Most definitely.

It does not matter what the cause of the failure is. If Christ set out to save men, and they nullify that effort, that is failure. To set out for something and not accomplish it is the very definition of failure.
Lol, ok.
Christ doesn't lose any of His sheep.
Romans 3 says you don't.

Nope, Christ Himself did the heavy lifting.

I found these replies to be shallow and disengenuous.

I find your theology and concept of reality to be completely alien, and almost completely divorced from the meaning of the Gospels.

No surprise the theological permutations of calvinists go off into un-christian tangents constantly.