[maryz]

I actually did a long response to this post yesterday -- unfortunately, by some reflex, I closed the tab before it posted. Today, I'll just go through the major points.

First, I'm more confused about your understanding of will than I was before -- it sounds confused and self-contradictory. From other comments on the thread, I don't seem to be the only one who had this reaction. Maybe you'll want to try it again, from the top?

Second: Of course, your understanding of the Church's teaching seems equally confused. I can only speak for the western Church, but in a nutshell: results of the Fall, in addition to "Sin and Death and Misery, Death's Harbinger," the powers of the soul, traditionally named as memory, intellect and will, were weakened -- not destroyed, making it more difficult to apprehend the Truth and act on it.

Third, perhaps you're not aware that Trent reiterated its condemnations of Pelagianism and and semi-Pelagianism as well as condemning the Calvinist view.

[kosta50]

the powers of the soul, traditionally named as memory, intellect and will, were weakened -- not destroyed, making it more difficult to apprehend the Truth and act on it.

Correct. The Church sees the human being as spiritually ill, but not dead, and in need of a spiritual physician (Christ) and a spiritual hospital (Church).

[The Council of] Trent reiterated its condemnations of Pelagianism and and semi-Pelagianism as well as condemning the Calvinist view.

HD has this thing about the Church being basically Pelagian and obviously thinks that any free will is a confession of ay least semi-Pelaginaism, which is of course completely off the mark.  The Church, both East and West, has maintained that salvation is neither accomplished by man's free will (Pelagianism), nor initiated by it (semi-Pelagianism). The Church steadfastly taught that man can do nothing without Grace, and that it is God who initiates and carries man's salvation.

But the Church also teaches synergy, where man, through his own free will cooperates with God the way a patient cooperates with a physician.  That is not (semi)Pelagianism.

[HarleyD]

First, I'm more confused about your understanding of will than I was before -- it sounds confused and self-contradictory.

This is my view on the will:

Rom 6:20-22 For when you were slaves of sin, you were free in regard to righteousness. But what fruit were you getting at that time from the things of which you are now ashamed? For the end of those things is death. But now that you have been set free from sin and have become slaves of God, the fruit you get leads to sanctification and its end, eternal life.

Before we became Christians we are slaves to sin. Our wills are bound to this slavery. When we have been set free from sin we become slaves to God. Our wills are bound to do the things that God wants us to do-not always perfect or all at once but always progressing.

There is no such thing as "free will" by which a man can make a choice of which one he wants. We are slaves to sin or slaves to righteousness.

...your understanding of the Church's teaching seems equally confused. I can only speak for the western Church, but in a nutshell: results of the Fall, in addition to "Sin and Death and Misery, Death's Harbinger," the powers of the soul, traditionally named as memory, intellect and will, were weakened -- not destroyed,

According to the above passage of scripture (and others) our will is not "weakened" but we have become slaves to it. If anyone would doubt this then simply try not to sin.

Third, perhaps you're not aware that Trent reiterated its condemnations of Pelagianism and and semi-Pelagianism

This is from Theopedia:

Semi-Pelagianism, admitted that man's nature was "injured" by original sin, but maintained that man still has free will and the ability to cooperate with God's grace in the salvation process. Semi-Pelagianism

Now how does this differ from Catholic doctrine?