To answer this question we have to address two issues:
- What did the anathemas in Trent mean?
- What does the R.C.C. say about salvation today?
First of all, the anathemas in Trent were condemnations to hell. Take, for example, Session 6, canon 12:
Canon XII -- Si quis dixerit, fidem justificantem nihil alind esse,
quam fiduciam divinae misericordiae peccata remittentis propter
Christum; vel eam fiduciam solam esse, qua justificamur: anathema sit.
CANON XII.-If any one saith, that justifying faith is nothing else but
confidence in the divine mercy which remits sins for Christ's sake;
or, that this confidence alone is that whereby we are justified; let
him be anathema.
We notice several details about this. This canon was specifically composed against Martin Luther who believed one was saved by grace alone apart from ones works.
From context and history we know very well what this anthema looked like. Here's the text from the papal bull, Exsurge Domini speaking against Luther:
As far as Martin himself is concerned, O good God, what have we
overlooked or not done? What fatherly charity have we omitted that we
might call him back from such errors? For after we had cited him,
wishing to deal more kindly with him, we urged him through various
conferences with our legate and through our personal letters to
abandon these errors. We have even offered him safe conduct and the
money necessary for the journey urging him to come without fear or any
misgivings, which perfect charity should cast out, and to talk not
secretly but openly and face to face after the example of our Savior
and the Apostle Paul. If he had done this, we are certain he would
have changed in heart, and he would have recognized his errors. He
would not have found all these errors in the Roman Curia which he
attacks so viciously, ascribing to it more than he should because of
the empty rumors of wicked men. We would have shown him clearer than
the light of day that the Roman pontiffs, our predecessors, whom he
injuriously attacks beyond all decency, never erred in their canons or
constitutions which he tries to assail. For, according to the prophet,
neither is healing oil nor the doctor lacking in Galaad.
But he always refused to listen and, despising the previous citation
and each and every one of the above overtures, disdained to come. To
the present day he has been contumacious. With a hardened spirit he
has continued under censure over a year. What is worse, adding evil to
evil, and on learning of the citation, he broke forth in a rash appeal
to a future council. This to be sure was contrary to the constitution
of Pius II and Julius II our predecessors that all appealing in this
way are to be punished with the penalties of heretics. In vain does he
implore the help of a council, since he openly admits that he does not
believe in a council.
Therefore we can, without any further citation or delay, proceed
against him to his condemnation and damnation as one whose faith is
notoriously suspect and in fact a true heretic with the full severity
of each and all of the above penalties and censures.
Note the words, "condemnation" and "Damnation." There can be no doubt as to what "anathema" means historically speaking.
Likewise, just to make sure there's no ambiguity, earlier on in Exsurge Domini we read:
With the advice and consent of these our venerable brothers, with
mature deliberation on each and every one of the above theses, and by
the authority of almighty God, the blessed Apostles Peter and Paul,
and our own authority, we condemn, reprobate, and reject completely
each of these theses or errors as either heretical, scandalous, false,
offensive to pious ears or seductive of simple minds, and against
Catholic truth. By listing them, we decree and declare that all the
faithful of both sexes must regard them as condemned, reprobated, and
rejected . . . We restrain all in the virtue of holy obedience and
under the penalty of an automatic major excommunication….
Moreover, because the preceding errors and many others are contained
in the books or writings of Martin Luther, we likewise condemn,
reprobate, and reject completely the books and all the writings and
sermons of the said Martin, whether in Latin or any other language,
containing the said errors or any one of them; and we wish them to be
regarded as utterly condemned, reprobated, and rejected.
Notice the words, "Major excommunication." What is Major Excommunication? The Catholic Encyclopedia describes it this way:
Ceremony of Excommunication (as described in The Catholic
Anathema remains a major excommunication which is to be promulgated
with great solemnity. A formula for this ceremony was drawn up by Pope
Zachary (741-52) in the chapter Debent duodecim sacerdotes, Cause xi,
quest. iii. The Roman Pontifical reproduces it in the chapter Ordo
excommunicandi et absolvendi, distinguishing three sorts of
excommunication: minor excommunication, formerly incurred by a person
holding communication with anyone under the ban of excommunication;
major excommunication, pronounced by the Pope in reading a sentence;
and anathema, or the penalty incurred by crimes of the gravest order,
and solemnly promulgated by the Pope. In passing this sentence, the
pontiff is vested in amice, stole, and a violet cope, wearing his
mitre, and assisted by twelve priests clad in their surplices and
holding lighted candles. He takes his seat in front of the altar or in
some other suitable place, amid pronounces the formula of anathema
which ends with these words: "Wherefore in the name of God the
All-powerful, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, of the Blessed Peter,
Prince of the Apostles, and of all the saints, in virtue of the power
which has been given us of binding and loosing in Heaven and on earth,
we deprive N-- himself and all his accomplices and all his abettors of
the Communion of the Body and Blood of Our Lord, we separate him from
the society of all Christians, we exclude him from the bosom of our
Holy Mother the Church in Heaven and on earth, we declare him
excommunicated and anathematized and we judge him condemned to eternal
fire with Satan and his angels and all the reprobate, so long as he
will not burst the fetters of the demon, do penance and satisfy the
Church; we deliver him to Satan to mortify his body, that his soul may
be saved on the day of judgment." Whereupon all the assistants
respond: "Fiat, fiat, fiat."
After they give the person the Major Excommunication, they anathematize him. Then notice the words, "Condemn to eternal fire" Then the priests chant, "Fiat, fiat, fiat."
It is only with complete duplicity and absurdity that anyone would conclude that, at Trent, they weren't condemning Luther and others to condemnation in hell.
But it gets even worse. In canon XII, notice the words, "Si quis dixerit." Notice the future perfect. They weren't content to just condemn Luther to hell. They also had to drive that anathema into the indefinite future with the indefinite pronoun followed by a future perfect. According to them, anyone and everyone who follows in Luther's teaching will also burn in hell forever.
So that covers Trent. What about the second issue: The R.C.C.'s view of protestants today. Who knows? And I don't mean that in a snarky way. What I mean to say is that the Roman Catholic Church in modern times changes its views with each pope. Consider the encyclical, Lumen Gentium:
Lumen gentium §16 says: "For they who without their own fault do not
know of the Gospel of Christ and His Church, but yet seek God with
sincere heart, and try, under the influence of grace, to carry out His
will in practice, known to them through the dictate of conscience, can
attain eternal salvation."
Note the words, "do not know of the Gospel of Christ." In Hebrews 11:6 it says that "without faith it is impossible to please God." But in more modern times the Roman Catholic Church has even gone to the extreme of saying that people who don't even know who Jesus is will end up in heaven.
In that sort of culture and context, there is no framework and foundation to conclude what they might do with Protestants today.