And I would say that is not what Christianity has taught before Martin Luther came on the scene. Is King David called wicked? We know he sinned, but does this make him wicked? Apparently, being considered wicked implies that one does NOT turn to God after sinning, not that a man will EVER sin...
The Bible is chock full of people who are righteous, who DO turn to God, even after sinning. Unforutately, because your paradigm is based on the premise that ALL are wicked, you will never understand Catholicism at its core.
Regards
That is not the way I am using "wicked". You know that I claim to be saved, and to have imputed righteousness, and yet I still sin and am "wicked" in the sense that all men are. POTS says that I will turn back to God after sinning as a believer. It is infused righteousness that confuses me. Is it correct that here one is ACTUALLY righteous for a time, then he sins and is transformed into a wicked man, then he confesses, is absolved and then transformed back into a righteous man?
The Bible is chock full of people who are righteous, who DO turn to God, even after sinning.
Sure, I fully agree. But, if we leave Mary out of it, no one is born righteous, do you agree? "Righteous" becomes an accurate description of some during life. We say it is accorded to those who have faith, a la Abraham. So, using perspective/relativity, I could say that a given man can be "righteous" at the same time as being fundamentally "wicked". The application of those two terms, is of course, very different. This is the whole idea behind imputed righteousness. Paul tells us that he does not do what he wants to do, but he does only what he hates. Yet, Paul was a righteous man.