Don’t have the time (nor the inclination) to comment on each item. But looking at the big picture, notice that the tenets are supported by small snippets of Scripture, the way an encylopedia is used as compared with understanding the flow of the story.
In particular, Canon 3 specifically addresses the Pelagian controversy and sides with Augustine. It uses a reasonable understanding of Rom. 10 as Paul quotes Isaiah. Yet, Canon 13 then uses the most misdirected, flimsy, wrongheaded understanding of John 8:36 to support the restoration of free will. Go read it yourself. Then read the larger context of John 8 and ask yourself...does it really have anything to do with the restoration of free will? Please... And don’t throw the YOPIOS up here. You are asking me to interpret what you have posted. You are interpreting what was stated at Orange. Understanding material is both necessary and fair.
But looking at the big picture, notice that the tenets are supported by small snippets of Scripture
It's not a Bible study, it's a doctrinal statement. That's how they're typically written, whether they're written by Catholics or Protestants. At least it takes the trouble to cite Scripture for its claims, unlike, say, this.
Yet, Canon 13 then uses the most misdirected, flimsy, wrongheaded understanding of John 8:36 to support the restoration of free will. Go read it yourself.
I did. It makes perfect sense to me, especially in view of verses 34 & 35.
II Orange is infallible Catholic dogma. Including this part:
CANON 18: ... Recompense is due to good works if they are performed; but grace, to which we have no claim, precedes them, to enable them to be done.
... which specifically contradicts a claim you make above.