Saint Anselm of Canterbury

1. Introduction

Anselm of Canterbury (c.1033–1109) was a Benedictine monk, abbot, and archbishop whose writings stand at the threshold of high medieval scholasticism. Working primarily in Normandy and England, he pursued theology and philosophy within a monastic setting, combining rigorous argument with meditative prayer. His programmatic motto, fides quaerens intellectum (“faith seeking understanding”), expresses his conviction that rational inquiry can deepen, clarify, and in some respects demonstrate what is first accepted in faith.

In philosophy of religion, Anselm is best known for the ontological argument, formulated in the Proslogion, which reasons a priori from the very concept of God as “that than which nothing greater can be thought” (id quo maius cogitari nequit) to God’s necessary existence. Alongside this single, compact argument, he also produced more traditional, cumulative arguments for God’s existence in the Monologion, exploring gradations of goodness and causality in the created world.

In doctrinal theology, his dialogue Cur Deus Homo (“Why God Became Man”) offers a systematic account of the Incarnation and atonement. Here he develops the influential notion of satisfaction (satisfactio): human sin is construed as a failure to render the honor and justice owed to God, restoring which requires a recompense only the God–man can provide. This soteriological model became a central reference point—admired, adapted, and contested—in later Western theology.

Beyond these famous works, Anselm wrote treatises on truth (De veritate), free choice (De libertate arbitrii), the fall of the devil (De casu diaboli), and the reconciliation of grace, predestination, and free will (De concordia). His metaphysics and ethics develop a theocentric vision in which rectitude, justice, and being are tightly interconnected.

Anselm’s historical significance extends from his role in the investiture conflict in England to his later reception as a Doctor of the Church. Modern scholarship assesses him both as a major philosopher of God and as a monastic spiritual writer whose arguments arise from and return to prayerful contemplation.

2. Life and Historical Context

Anselm’s life spans the mid‑11th to early 12th centuries, a period of intense ecclesiastical reform and political transformation in Western Europe. Born in Aosta (then within the Kingdom of Burgundy), he later moved into the orbit of Norman power in Normandy and England. His career therefore intersects with the rise of the Norman duchy, the consolidation of the Anglo‑Norman kingdom after 1066, and broader papal reform movements.

Chronological and Political Setting

Anselm’s adult life coincides with the Gregorian Reform, which aimed to strengthen clerical celibacy, free episcopal appointments from secular control, and affirm papal primacy. Historians emphasize that conflicts between Anselm and English kings William II and Henry I form one regional episode within this wider struggle over investiture and ecclesiastical autonomy.

Intellectual and Monastic Milieu

Anselm developed within the Benedictine reform tradition, shaped especially by the abbey of Bec. This environment cultivated lectio divina, meditative prayer, and a growing use of dialectic. Scholars debate how “scholastic” Anselm should be considered. One view describes him as a forerunner of urban schools and universities, given his systematic use of logical reasoning. Another stresses his fundamentally monastic orientation, arguing that his methods diverge from the later quaestio‑disputation format of high scholasticism.

His work also lies in continuity with Augustinian and Boethian thought. He inherits themes such as divine illumination, the hierarchy of being, and the priority of the will, reworking them under new conditions of scriptural exegesis and institutional reform.

Ecclesial Role

As Archbishop of Canterbury, Anselm occupied a key see in the Anglo‑Norman Church, mediating between Roman reform ideals and royal expectations. Some historians stress his alignment with papal positions; others highlight his attempts at compromise and his concern for pastoral governance as much as for ecclesial liberty. These contextual dynamics frame the composition and later reception of many of his writings.

3. Early Life in Aosta and Entry into Monasticism

Anselm was born around 1033 in Aosta, a town in the Alpine region of the Kingdom of Burgundy (now northern Italy). Sources, especially Eadmer’s Vita Anselmi, describe his family as of relatively high social standing, with a devout mother, Ermenberga, and a more severe father, Gundulf. Accounts of his childhood emphasize early piety and intellectual promise, though modern historians note that such retrospective portrayals often follow hagiographic conventions and may idealize his youth.

Formative Experiences in Aosta and Beyond

According to traditional narratives, Anselm as a boy entertained monastic ambitions and experienced a visionary dream involving a feast on a mountain, interpreted as foreshadowing his later vocation. After the death of his mother, tensions with his father reportedly increased, leading Anselm, in his early twenties, to leave home and travel through Burgundy and France. These years of wandering are sparsely documented; some scholars suggest they provided exposure to different reforming monasteries and to the emerging intellectual centers of the region.

Attraction to the Benedictine Life

By the late 1050s Anselm had encountered Lanfranc, then prior of the Benedictine abbey of Bec in Normandy, whose reputation as a teacher drew many students. Anselm’s decision to enter monastic life at Bec around 1059–1060 is generally seen as the outcome of both spiritual longing and disenchantment with secular ambitions. The Benedictine ideal of stability, prayer, and study, as renewed in 11th‑century reforms, offered a structured context for his intellectual and spiritual aspirations.

Some scholars interpret his move as part of a broader pattern whereby sons of the regional elite channeled their education and status into reformed monasteries. Others highlight the personal dimension: Anselm’s writings later reflect a recurring concern with obedience, humility, and the healing of the will, which some read against the background of his early family conflicts.

Entry into Bec

At Bec, Anselm undertook the monastic profession, committing to the Benedictine rule. While precise details of his novitiate are not extant, his rapid rise to the position of prior in 1063 suggests both intellectual distinction and recognized spiritual maturity. This early phase marks the transition from a largely undocumented youth to the more securely attested monastic scholar who would shape the intellectual profile of Bec and, later, of Canterbury.

4. The Abbey of Bec: Teacher and Abbot

The Benedictine abbey of Bec in Normandy was the primary setting for Anselm’s intellectual and spiritual formation. Founded in 1034 and reformed under Abbot Herluin, Bec became, by the mid‑11th century, an important center of learning. After entering the community, Anselm quickly emerged as a leading figure.

Prior and Teacher (1063–1078)

In 1063 Anselm succeeded Lanfranc as prior. His responsibilities included the internal discipline of the community, formation of novices, and teaching. Contemporary and later testimonies describe him as an engaging instructor whose method combined careful reasoning with pastoral sensitivity. The dialogical form of many of his early treatises—posing questions and responding to objections—likely reflects his classroom interactions.

Bec attracted students from across Normandy, England, and beyond, including future bishops and abbots. This created a trans‑regional network through which Anselm’s ideas circulated. Scholars note that his early major works, the Monologion and Proslogion, were composed while prior, at the request of fellow monks who sought meditative models for rational reflection on faith.

Abbot and Administrator (1078–1093)

Upon Herluin’s death in 1078, Anselm was elected abbot. His role expanded to include property administration, relations with lay patrons, and oversight of Bec’s dependent priories, some in England. Sources depict him as reluctant to accept the office, consistent with monastic ideals of humility, but he nonetheless became a key ecclesiastical figure in Norman society.

As abbot, Anselm traveled frequently to England to visit Bec’s possessions. These journeys brought him into contact with the English church hierarchy and nobility, laying the groundwork for his later election as Archbishop of Canterbury. They also exposed him to emerging tensions between monastic ideals and royal authority.

Intellectual Output at Bec

During his years as teacher and abbot, Anselm composed several philosophical and theological treatises: De veritate, De libertate arbitrii, and De casu diaboli, alongside prayers and meditations. The monastic context shaped their style: they are relatively brief, use dialogue form, and often begin from questions raised by fellow monks. Modern interpreters sometimes describe Bec as a “laboratory” where Anselm developed a distinctive fusion of spiritual direction and conceptual analysis.

While some historians portray Bec under Anselm as an early prototype of the scholastic school, others caution that its life remained primarily liturgical and contemplative, with study serving monastic observance rather than academic specialization. Nonetheless, Bec provided the institutional stability and intellectual community in which Anselm’s characteristic thought took shape.

5. Archbishop of Canterbury and the Investiture Conflict

Anselm’s elevation to Archbishop of Canterbury in 1093 inserted him into the English phase of the wider investiture controversy, the struggle over whether secular rulers or the papacy held authority to appoint and invest bishops.

Election and Early Tensions under William II

After Lanfranc’s death (1089), the see of Canterbury remained vacant while King William II (Rufus) appropriated its revenues. When the king fell seriously ill in 1093, pressure from nobles and clergy led to Anselm’s reluctant appointment and consecration as archbishop. Almost immediately, disputes arose on two fronts:

• Ownership of Canterbury’s lands and revenues: Anselm sought the restitution of church property; William resisted reductions to royal income.
• Allegiance to the papacy: Anselm wished to recognize Pope Urban II, while William had not yet acknowledged him, maintaining control over which pope English bishops could support.

These conflicts culminated in councils (notably Rockingham, 1095) where royal officials challenged Anselm’s loyalty. No definitive settlement was reached, and relations remained strained.

First Exile (1097–1100)

In 1097, amid unresolved disputes over obedience to Rome and royal demands for funds, Anselm left England with the king’s permission, effectively entering exile. He traveled to the Continent, met Pope Urban II, and participated in the Council of Bari (1098), where he defended the Western doctrine of the procession of the Holy Spirit. During this exile he also worked on Cur Deus Homo. William II’s death in 1100 opened the way for his return.

Negotiations with Henry I and the Investiture Question

Under Henry I, the central issue became lay investiture: the king’s practice of granting the ring and staff to bishops. Anselm, aligning with papal decrees, held that such investiture by lay rulers was incompatible with ecclesial freedom. Henry, however, insisted on preserving traditional royal prerogatives.

The conflict led to another period of absence from England (1103–1106), during which Anselm conferred with Pope Paschal II. Ultimately, a compromise was reached in 1107: Henry renounced the act of investiture with ring and staff, while retaining the right to receive homage from bishops for temporal possessions. Historians differ on whether this settlement is best read as a victory for papal reform or as a pragmatic balance between royal and ecclesiastical authority.

Pastoral and Reforming Activity

Alongside these political struggles, Anselm convened church councils in England, addressed clerical discipline (including lay investiture’s practical effects), and worked to strengthen ecclesiastical structures. Some accounts emphasize his role as a champion of libertas ecclesiae (freedom of the Church); others stress his efforts to maintain peace and unity amid competing claims, highlighting the complexity of his position within a contested reform movement.

6. Intellectual Development and Method

Anselm’s intellectual development unfolds across his monastic and episcopal career, but displays a consistent methodological core summarized in the phrase fides quaerens intellectum. This approach guides both his early meditations at Bec and his later systematic treatises.

Phases of Development

Scholars often note that, unlike many later scholastics, Anselm does not write commentaries on the Sentences or Scripture in the scholastic format. Instead, his works originate in specific questions posed by monks or pastoral concerns, then develop into broader theoretical explorations.

Methodological Features

1. Starting from faith, arguing with reason
   Anselm typically begins from doctrines or premises accepted within Christian belief (e.g., that God exists, that God is just). He then seeks to show their rational “necessity” or fittingness. He insists that this inquiry is undertaken by a believer, but he also aspires to arguments that do not simply presuppose authority.

2. Dialectical structure
   Many works adopt a dialogue between master and student, with objections formulated and answered. This fosters clarification of concepts and careful distinction-making. Modern commentators see in this an anticipation of later scholastic quaestiones, though in a simpler, more literary form.

3. Appeal to “necessary reasons” (rationes necessariae)
   Anselm frequently aims to show that certain consequences follow with necessity of the consequence (necessitas consequentiae) from what God has willed or from divine nature. His nuanced account of different kinds of necessity underpins his reconciliation of freedom and predestination, and his explanations of why the Incarnation is “necessary.”

4. Integration of prayer and argument
   Works such as the Proslogion are cast as prayers. Some scholars interpret this as indicating that his project is primarily spiritual, using reason as a tool for contemplation. Others argue that, despite the devotional form, he advances robust philosophical arguments that can be abstracted from their prayerful setting.

Relation to Predecessors and Successors

Anselm draws heavily on Augustine and Boethius, especially in logic, metaphysics, and theories of time and eternity. Later scholastics, including Thomas Aquinas and Duns Scotus, engage with his arguments—sometimes adopting his distinctions (e.g., necessity types), sometimes revising them. Interpretive debates turn on whether to read Anselm as primarily a monastic theologian or as a proto‑scholastic philosopher; most contemporary scholarship acknowledges significant elements of both.

7. Major Works and Their Composition

Anselm’s corpus consists of philosophical‑theological treatises, dialogues, and devotional texts. Their composition is closely tied to phases of his career, often arising from concrete requests or controversies.

Overview of Major Works

Composition Circumstances and Aims

• Monologion and Proslogion were written in close succession. The Monologion offers multiple, semi‑independent arguments for God’s existence and nature; the Proslogion aims at a more elegant unity. Anselm’s dissatisfaction with the former’s complexity led to the latter’s composition.

• Dialogues from Bec (De veritate, De libertate arbitrii, De casu diaboli) grow out of teaching sessions and monastic debates. Their form—master and interlocutor—reflects pedagogical origins.

• Cur Deus Homo was composed mainly during Anselm’s first exile from England. It purports to answer a non‑believer’s questions, though it presumes familiarity with Christian doctrine. Its dialogical structure between Anselm and his student Boso allows for systematic development of the “satisfaction” theory.

• Later Christological and soteriological works refine and respond to criticisms or perceived gaps in earlier writings, particularly concerning original sin, the nature of Christ, and Trinitarian relations.

• The Prayers and Meditations circulate widely, often independently of his more technical treatises. They exhibit the same concern for rectitude and divine majesty, but in a lyrical, affective key.

Textual scholars generally agree on Anselm’s authorship and dates within the ranges above, though specific year assignments remain approximate for some works. The coherence across these writings supports the view of a single, sustained intellectual project developing through changing historical circumstances.

8. Faith Seeking Understanding: Anselm’s Program

Anselm’s intellectual program is encapsulated in his often‑cited statement from the Proslogion:

"

“I do not seek to understand so that I may believe, but I believe so that I may understand. For I believe this also, that unless I believe I shall not understand.”

— Anselm, Proslogion, Preface

Core Idea of Fides Quaerens Intellectum

Faith seeking understanding (fides quaerens intellectum) expresses the view that faith is both prior to and productive of rational inquiry. For Anselm, faith supplies foundational truths—such as God’s existence, goodness, and the Incarnation—while reason explores their implications, coherence, and “fittingness.” This is not a quest to replace faith with proof, but to deepen intellectual apprehension of what is believed.

Anselm often emphasizes that belief opens the mind to realities otherwise inaccessible: without faith, certain truths about God would remain opaque. Yet he also maintains that, once accepted, these truths can be examined through necessary reasons that display their rational structure.

Scope and Limits of Understanding

In works like the Monologion and Proslogion, Anselm exemplifies this program by undertaking arguments for God’s existence and attributes. In Cur Deus Homo, he seeks to explain why the Incarnation is necessary or supremely fitting given divine justice. Across these cases, understanding involves:

• Showing that doctrines are non‑contradictory and internally coherent.
• Exhibiting their necessity of consequence from God’s nature and will.
• Illuminating their moral and metaphysical rationale.

At the same time, Anselm acknowledges that human reason cannot fully grasp God’s essence. The Proslogion moves from apparent proof of God’s existence to recognition of the limits of comprehension, expressing both intellectual satisfaction and apophatic humility.

Interpretive Perspectives

Scholars diverge on how to characterize Anselm’s program:

• One interpretation sees him as an early proponent of natural theology, seeking rational demonstrations accessible even to those who do not share Christian faith.
• Another stresses the intra‑faith character of his arguments: they are exercises for believers, presupposing and serving Christian commitment.
• A mediating view holds that Anselm aims at arguments that are formally independent of revelation but are historically and psychologically developed within the believing community.

Despite these debates, there is broad agreement that fides quaerens intellectum marks an important stage in the medieval articulation of the relationship between theology and philosophy, inaugurating a style of reasoning that later scholastic thinkers systematized.

9. The Ontological Argument and Philosophy of God

Anselm’s ontological argument, presented in Proslogion 2–4, is one of the most discussed arguments in philosophy of religion. It proceeds a priori, without appeal to empirical premises, from the concept of God to God’s existence.

Structure of the Argument

The key starting point is Anselm’s definition:

"

“You are that than which nothing greater can be thought.”

— Anselm, Proslogion 2

The argument can be schematically summarized:

1. Even “the fool” who denies God’s existence understands the phrase “that than which nothing greater can be thought”; thus the concept exists in the understanding.
2. A being that exists both in the understanding and in reality is greater than one existing only in the understanding.
3. If “that than which nothing greater can be thought” existed only in the understanding, a greater being—existing also in reality—could be thought.
4. This contradicts the definition of God as that than which nothing greater can be thought.
5. Therefore, God must exist in reality as well as in the understanding.

In Proslogion 3, Anselm adds a further step: such a being cannot be thought not to exist; thus, God exists necessarily, not contingently.

Interpretive Variants

Commentators diverge on how best to formalize and evaluate the argument:

• Some read it as presupposing a maximally great being whose existence is included in the very concept of maximal greatness.
• Others interpret it as a claim about degrees of reality or perfection, where existence in re is a “great‑making” property.
• A further approach sees the argument as based on a modal intuition: a being whose non‑existence is impossible is greater than one whose non‑existence is possible.

Modern analytic philosophers have developed formal reconstructions, notably in modal logic (e.g., versions associated with Charles Hartshorne and Alvin Plantinga), while also raising objections about whether existence can function as a property.

Immediate Medieval Responses

Anselm’s contemporary Gaunilo of Marmoutiers objected in his In Behalf of the Fool, using the example of a “perfect island” to argue that Anselm’s reasoning could absurdly prove the existence of any conceived perfection. Anselm replied that his argument applies only to a being whose greatness is unlimited and necessary, not to contingent objects like islands.

Later medieval thinkers such as Thomas Aquinas acknowledged the ingenuity of the argument but expressed reservations, often claiming it presupposes knowledge of God that we do not possess or disputing the move from concept to existence.

Philosophy of God Beyond the Argument

Within the Proslogion, the ontological argument serves as a gateway to exploring divine attributes: simplicity, omnipotence, goodness, justice, mercy, and eternity. Anselm’s conception of God as “that than which nothing greater can be thought” undergirds his broader perfect being theology, influencing subsequent debates on divine nature even among those who reject the argument’s validity.

10. Metaphysics and Divine Attributes

Anselm’s metaphysics is tightly linked to his theology of God as the supreme being. He develops a perfect being framework in which all metaphysical questions about creation, truth, and goodness are oriented toward God as their source.

God as Supreme Being and Source of All

In the Monologion, Anselm argues from the existence of degrees of goodness, greatness, and being in creatures to the existence of a supreme good and supreme being from which all perfections derive. This reasoning reflects an Augustinian pattern: multiple good things participate in an unchanging, maximal Good.

He maintains that created beings have their existence and value by participation in God. God alone exists per se, while creatures exist ab alio (from another). This relation shapes his understanding of contingency: creatures can cease to be; God, as necessary being, cannot.

Divine Simplicity and Attributes

Anselm affirms divine simplicity: God is not composed of parts or properties, and God’s attributes are not distinct components in God. Rather, God is identical with his attributes (God is justice, goodness, life, etc.). In Monologion and Proslogion, he explores how diverse predicates—just, merciful, omnipotent—can be said truly of a simple God without implying composition.

To reconcile apparent tensions (e.g., justice vs. mercy), Anselm argues that such attributes are different ways finite minds apprehend the one, simple divine essence in relation to different effects. Scholarly interpretations vary: some see a clear, early articulation of classical simplicity; others note unresolved tensions, especially when he speaks of God willing multiple things.

Eternity, Necessity, and Possibility

Influenced by Boethius, Anselm conceives divine eternity as timeless present. In De concordia, he describes God as existing simultaneously with all times, perceiving them in a single act. This underlies his distinction between:

• Necessitas consequentis (necessity of the consequent): the state of affairs itself must be.
• Necessitas consequentiae (necessity of the consequence): if certain premises hold, then a result follows, even if the result remains contingent in itself.

This framework supports his reconciliation of divine foreknowledge and predestination with human free choice: from God’s vantage, future acts are certain; from the creaturely perspective, they remain freely chosen and contingent.

Creation and Ontology of Natures

Anselm treats created natures (e.g., rational, animal, corporeal) as stable forms grounding the properties of individuals. He distinguishes between what a thing is essentially and how it may contingently be disposed. In discussions of angels, humans, and the devil, he examines how natures can be good as created, yet subject to moral deviation through will.

Some historians argue that Anselm’s metaphysics anticipates later realist accounts of universals, given his talk of common natures and participation; others emphasize that he does not systematically theorize universals in the way later scholastics do. Nonetheless, his metaphysical vocabulary—simplicity, participation, necessity—became central reference points for subsequent medieval thought about God and creation.

11. Truth, Rectitude, and Logical Theory

Anselm’s treatise De veritate (“On Truth”) offers a distinctive account of truth as rectitude (rectitudo), extending across thought, will, and things. This conceptualization underlies his broader logical and ethical outlook.

Truth as Rectitude

In De veritate, Anselm defines truth broadly:

"

“Truth is rectitude perceptible only to the mind.”

— Anselm, De veritate 2

He distinguishes several loci of truth:

• In propositions: truth is the rectitude whereby a statement signifies what is as it is.
• In thought: truth consists in the mind’s conformity to what it ought to think.
• In the will: truth is the will’s rectitude in willing what it ought to will.
• In things: truth lies in their being as they ought to be according to their natures.

Thus, truth is not limited to correspondence between statements and facts; it includes normative dimensions—the alignment of being, thinking, and willing with their proper standards. This broad sense of rectitude supports his accounts of justice, sin, and salvation.

Hierarchy and Participation of Truths

Anselm holds that all finite truths participate in God, who is supreme truth. Created truths can fail (things can be corrupted, wills can deviate), but the exemplar truth in God is immutable. Consequently, logical and moral rectitudes are grounded in the divine nature.

He further distinguishes between accidental rectitude (which can be lost) and essential rectitude (which cannot). This distinction appears in discussions of angels and the possibility of sin, linking metaphysical and moral orders.

Logical and Semantic Reflections

While Anselm did not compose a formal logic textbook, his writings exhibit sustained attention to logical relations:

• In the Monologion and Proslogion, he carefully contrasts being in the understanding vs being in reality, anticipating later discussions of intentionality and reference.
• In De grammatico, a short work sometimes attributed to Anselm and commonly associated with his circle, medieval logicians explore issues of signification and predication (though modern scholars debate its precise authorship).

He frequently employs and clarifies distinctions such as:

Some historians regard Anselm as an important transitional figure between earlier, more rhetorical theology and later scholastic logic, noting his precise formulations and anticipatory use of technical vocabulary. Others caution that, compared with 13th‑century logicians, his logical reflections remain relatively unsystematic, embedded in theological argument rather than forming an independent discipline.

Nevertheless, his notion of truth as rectitude significantly influenced medieval discussions of veracity, justice, and the nature of propositions, especially within the Augustinian tradition.

12. Freedom, Will, and Moral Responsibility

Anselm’s account of freedom and the will is developed primarily in De libertate arbitrii (“On Freedom of Choice”), De casu diaboli (“On the Fall of the Devil”), and De concordia. He offers a definition of freedom that departs from views equating it with the capacity to sin.

Freedom as Rectitude of Will

In De libertate arbitrii 3, Anselm famously states:

"

“The will is free, not because it can turn to sin, but because it is able to preserve its rectitude for its own sake.”

— Anselm, De libertate arbitrii 3

Here free choice (liberum arbitrium) is the power to maintain rectitude of will—willing what one ought—for its own sake, not merely out of fear or self‑interest. Freedom is thus defined positively, in terms of adherence to the good, rather than negatively, as indifference between options.

This allows Anselm to say that God and the blessed angels are supremely free despite being unable to sin: their wills are perfectly fixed in rectitude.

Structure of the Will and Possibility of Sin

In De casu diaboli, Anselm examines how angels, initially created with rectitude, could fall. He distinguishes between different inclinations or affections of the will (for justice vs. for happiness) and considers how the failure to will justice for its own sake leads to sin. Yet he insists that the created will retains responsibility: no external coercion or deficiency in creation causes sin.

Scholars debate how fully Anselm articulates a theory of two affections of the will later developed by thinkers like Duns Scotus. Some see in his analysis a proto‑Scotist distinction; others argue that Anselm’s account is less technically differentiated and more concerned with moral exhortation.

Freedom, Necessity, and Foreknowledge

De concordia addresses the apparent tension between divine foreknowledge and predestination on one hand, and human free choice on the other. Anselm deploys his distinction between necessitas consequentis and necessitas consequentiae: while it is necessarily true that if God foreknows an act, it will occur (necessity of the consequence), the act itself remains contingent and freely chosen (no necessity of the consequent).

He maintains that God’s timeless knowledge does not impose causal necessity on human actions. Similarly, divine grace moves the will without coercing it, enabling the preservation of rectitude rather than compelling specific acts against the agent’s desire.

Moral Responsibility

Anselm’s framework undergirds a robust sense of moral responsibility: agents are responsible insofar as they possess and can exercise the power to keep rectitude for its own sake. Sin is a voluntary loss of rectitude, not merely a failure of knowledge or external constraint. This supports his later soteriological claims about the need for satisfaction and the meaningfulness of repentance.

Modern commentators situate Anselm at an early stage in the Western tradition of compatibilism—holding that freedom is compatible with certain forms of necessity—though they differ on how closely his views align with later philosophical definitions of compatibilism or libertarianism.

13. Atonement and the Incarnation in Cur Deus Homo

In Cur Deus Homo (“Why God Became Man”), Anselm presents a systematic account of the Incarnation and atonement grounded in divine justice and satisfaction. The work, cast as a dialogue between Anselm and his student Boso, aims to show the rational “necessity” or fittingness of the God–man’s redemptive work.

The Problem of Sin and Divine Justice

Anselm starts from the premise that humans owe God complete obedience and honor. Sin is defined as a failure to render this due, thereby disturbing the order of justice and rectitude. Because God is perfectly just, this disorder cannot simply be ignored: either punishment must follow or satisfaction must be made.

Humanity, however, is incapable of offering adequate satisfaction, since every act of obedience is already owed and cannot make up for previous failures. Thus arises an apparent dilemma: God cannot simply remit sin without compromising justice, yet humans cannot repay what they owe.

Satisfaction and the Necessity of the God–Man

Anselm formulates his key solution:

"

“There is no injustice in God’s forgiving the sinner, because he receives from man what he is owed; but since man cannot of himself pay what he owes, someone else must pay for him.”

— Anselm, Cur Deus Homo II.20 (paraphrastic sense)

He argues that only a being who is both God and man can provide the requisite satisfaction:

• As man, Christ belongs to the human race that owes the debt and can legitimately offer recompense on its behalf.
• As God, Christ’s act possesses infinite worth, sufficient to outweigh all sins.

Anselm presents this as a necessary consequence of divine justice and wisdom, though he leaves room for God’s freedom in choosing this particular manner of salvation.

Distinctive Features and Debates

Several features distinguish Anselm’s account:

• It shifts emphasis from ransom theories (e.g., paying a price to the devil) to a focus on God’s honor and justice.
• It treats atonement in juridical and moral terms, highlighting objective rectification rather than subjective transformation alone.
• It frames the Crucifixion as a voluntary act of obedience and gift, not as an externally imposed punishment on Christ.

Later theologians and scholars have debated aspects of this model:

• Some praise its coherence and its grounding of grace in divine justice.
• Critics argue it risks portraying God as bound by a quasi‑feudal honor code, or underplaying themes of love, mercy, and victory over evil.
• Others question how strongly the “necessity” claims should be read: as absolute necessity, or as a strong fittingness given divine decisions.

Despite such debates, Cur Deus Homo became a cornerstone for many Western accounts of satisfaction atonement, influencing medieval, Reformation, and modern discussions of the cross and Incarnation.

14. Anselm’s Theology of Sin, Grace, and Salvation

Beyond Cur Deus Homo, Anselm develops a broader theology of sin, grace, and salvation, especially in De conceptu virginali et de originali peccato, De casu diaboli, and De concordia.

Sin and Original Sin

Anselm defines sin as the absence of the rectitude that a will ought to have, a privation rather than a positive substance. In De casu diaboli, he applies this notion to angelic sin; in De conceptu virginali, to human beings.

On original sin, he argues that all humans (except Christ) are born lacking the original justice that should be present. This inherited state is not merely imitation but involves real guilt and liability to punishment. He interprets it as the loss of a supernatural gift owed to humanity in Adam, not simply natural weakness.

Some scholars note that Anselm’s account develops Augustinian ideas in a more juridical and ontological key, emphasizing the loss of owed rectitude. Others suggest that his interpretation anticipates later Western views of inherited guilt, while differing from Eastern Christian emphases on mortality and corruption.

Grace and Restored Rectitude

Grace in Anselm is God’s gratuitous action restoring rectitude to the fallen will. Although he strongly emphasizes satisfaction and justice, he also describes grace as unmerited and prior to human good works. Human beings cannot initiate their own healing; God moves and assists the will so that it can once again will rightly.

In De concordia, Anselm explores how grace, predestination, and foreknowledge coexist with free choice. He argues that:

• God’s predestination is an eternal decision to grant grace and glory.
• This does not negate freedom, since grace enables, rather than coerces, right willing.
• Human merit itself presupposes grace, yet remains genuinely attributable to the person.

Interpretations differ on whether Anselm should be classified as more “Augustinian” (emphasizing divine initiative and predestination) or as leaving more room for cooperative synergy. His relatively brief treatment leaves some questions open that later scholastics would address in detail.

Salvation and the Order of Justice

For Anselm, salvation consists in the restoration and consummation of rectitude:

• Objectively, through Christ’s satisfaction and merit.
• Subjectively, through grace‑enabled faith, love, and obedience.

He sees the eschatological state as one in which the will is fixed in rectitude and can no longer sin, thus achieving perfect freedom. Punishment, by contrast, is the just consequence of persisting without rectitude.

Anselm does not systematize doctrines such as purgatory or the number of the elect, though later interpreters apply his principles in those areas. Modern scholars debate the extent to which his emphasis on justice leaves room for themes of divine mercy and compassion; defenders point to his frequent insistence that God’s mercy operates precisely by restoring the rectitude that justice requires.

15. Prayer, Spirituality, and Pastoral Concerns

Anselm’s spiritual writings, particularly his Prayers and Meditations, reveal a dimension of his thought oriented toward personal devotion and pastoral care. These texts circulated widely and influenced medieval piety.

Prayers and Meditations

The Orationes sive Meditationes include prayers to Christ, the Virgin Mary, and various saints, as well as meditations on sin, redemption, and the desire for God. They are characterized by:

• Intense expressions of contrition and acknowledgement of personal unworthiness.
• Vivid contemplations of Christ’s passion and divine attributes.
• Repeated petitions for the grace to love God above all and to persevere in rectitude.

These prayers often echo the conceptual vocabulary of his treatises—rectitude, justice, mercy—but translated into affective and imaginative language. Medieval readers used them as models for private devotion, and they were copied and adapted in various monastic contexts.

Integration of Contemplation and Reason

Works such as the Proslogion exemplify Anselm’s integration of prayer and philosophical reflection. The text is formally an address to God, yet it contains tightly structured argumentation. This dual character has led scholars to describe Anselm’s spirituality as intellectualist (seeking God through understanding) but deeply contemplative.

His spirituality stresses:

• Desire for God as the ultimate fulfillment of the rational creature.
• Humility and recognition of the limits of understanding.
• The use of reason as a way of loving God with the mind, not as a rival to faith.

Pastoral Letters and Guidance

Anselm’s letters (not detailed in the major works list but extant in collections) show him offering counsel to monks, nuns, and laypersons on issues such as obedience, temptation, and sorrow. He addresses, for example, the grief of the bereaved and the scruples of those troubled by sin, combining doctrinal clarity with empathetic concern.

As abbot and archbishop, he convened synods, issued statutes, and sought to reform clergy and laity in line with monastic and Gregorian ideals. He advocated for clerical celibacy and against simony, while also showing attention to local circumstances. Historians differ on how strict or flexible his pastoral implementation was, but his writings testify to a sustained concern for the spiritual welfare of those under his care.

Spiritual Legacy

Anselm’s devotions influenced later affective mysticism, particularly through their emphasis on Christ’s humanity and the believer’s emotional response. Some see them as a bridge between earlier monastic spirituality and the more affective currents of the 12th and 13th centuries. Others stress their continuity with a longer Augustinian tradition of interiority and confession. In any case, they demonstrate that his intellectual project was embedded in and supported by a lived practice of prayer and pastoral ministry.

16. Reception, Criticism, and Debates (Gaunilo to Modernity)

Anselm’s thought has generated extensive reception and criticism from his contemporaries to the present, especially concerning the ontological argument and satisfaction theory of atonement.

Medieval Responses

• Gaunilo of Marmoutiers (late 11th c.) challenged the ontological argument using the famous “perfect island” analogy, contending that Anselm’s reasoning illegitimately infers existence from a concept. Anselm replied, arguing that his proof applies uniquely to a being whose greatness is unlimited and necessary.

• Thomas Aquinas (13th c.) acknowledged Anselm’s insight but rejected the ontological argument, claiming humans do not know God’s essence well enough to derive existence from it. Nevertheless, Aquinas drew on Anselm’s discussions of divine attributes and satisfaction, adapting them within his own synthesis.

• Later scholastics such as Duns Scotus and William of Ockham engaged Anselm’s views on will, freedom, and necessity, sometimes adopting his distinctions, sometimes revising them. Scotus, for example, develops a more detailed affection‑based psychology of the will partly in dialogue with Anselm’s account.

Reformation and Post‑Reformation

Protestant reformers and post‑Reformation theologians frequently engaged Cur Deus Homo. Many appreciated its focus on Christ’s substitutionary satisfaction of divine justice, seeing affinities with their own doctrines of atonement and justification. Others critiqued or nuanced Anselm’s feudal imagery and the juridical framing of sin and grace.

Catholic theologians, particularly within the Thomist tradition, often integrated Anselm’s insights into broader syntheses, sometimes softening his necessity claims or extending his account to incorporate themes of charity and deification.

Early Modern Philosophy

The ontological argument reappears prominently in early modern philosophy:

• René Descartes formulates a related proof based on the idea of a supremely perfect being whose essence involves existence, explicitly echoing Anselm.
• Leibniz later attempts to demonstrate that the concept of a most perfect being is coherent, thereby defending a refined Anselmian argument.

Immanuel Kant famously criticizes all ontological arguments, arguing that “existence is not a real predicate.” This critique significantly shaped modern philosophical attitudes, leading many to dismiss Anselm’s argument as fallacious. Nonetheless, 20th‑century analytic philosophers revisited it, proposing modal versions and debating its logical structure.

Modern Theological Assessments

Anselm’s satisfaction theory has been variously received:

• Supporters see it as a profound articulation of how God’s love respects justice, influencing many Western atonement models.
• Critics—especially from liberation, feminist, and some Eastern Christian perspectives—contend it risks legitimating violence, overemphasizing legal categories, or depicting God as demanding retribution.
• Alternative atonement theories (moral influence, Christus Victor, participatory models) often define themselves partly in contrast to “Anselmian” themes, though some scholars argue these contrasts oversimplify his actual position.

Contemporary Scholarship

Modern Anselm studies examine his works as a coherent system, integrating philosophical, theological, and spiritual dimensions. Debates persist over:

• Whether his arguments can function independently of faith commitments.
• How to interpret his use of “necessity.”
• The extent to which later “Anselmian” doctrines accurately represent his views.

Overall, Anselm remains a central reference point in discussions of God’s existence, divine attributes, atonement, and the relation of faith and reason, with ongoing disputes ensuring his continued relevance.

17. Legacy and Historical Significance

Anselm’s legacy spans multiple domains: medieval scholasticism, Western doctrines of God and atonement, and Christian spirituality.

Influence on Medieval Thought

Anselm is often regarded as a key figure in the transition to scholastic theology. His systematic use of dialectic within a theological framework influenced monastic and school traditions alike. Later thinkers drew on:

• His concept of God as “that than which nothing greater can be thought,” which became foundational for perfect being theology.
• His distinctions concerning necessity, freedom, and rectitude, which informed debates on foreknowledge and moral responsibility.
• His satisfaction model of atonement, which shaped Western soteriology for centuries.

Though later scholastic methods developed far beyond his relatively simple dialogues, Anselm is frequently cited as an originator of the scholastic spirit of rigorous reasoning in theology.

Ecclesial Recognition

Within the Catholic Church, Anselm’s importance was formally acknowledged when he was canonized (1494) and later declared a Doctor of the Church (1720). These acts recognize not only his holiness but also the doctrinal value of his teaching. His liturgical commemoration and ongoing citation in magisterial documents underscore his standing as a normative theological voice, especially on God’s nature and the Incarnation.

Impact on Philosophy of Religion

In modern philosophy, Anselm’s ontological argument remains a focal point for discussions of the rationality of theism. Even critics who reject its soundness acknowledge its conceptual originality and stimulus to developments in modal logic and metaphysics. The broader Anselmian approach—conceiving God as the greatest conceivable being—continues to inform contemporary debates over divine attributes, including omnipotence, omniscience, and perfect goodness.

Spiritual and Pastoral Legacy

Anselm’s Prayers and Meditations influenced medieval devotional practices and later Christian spirituality, contributing to traditions of affective meditation on Christ’s passion and on divine mercy. His integration of intellectual inquiry and contemplative prayer has appealed to monastic and lay readers alike, offering a model of spirituality that embraces both heart and mind.

Modern Assessments

Modern historians and theologians evaluate Anselm’s significance in varied ways:

• Some emphasize his role as a bridge figure between earlier patristic theology and later scholastic systems.
• Others highlight his contribution to shaping Western legal and moral conceptions of sin, guilt, and atonement, whether praised as clarifying or critiqued as problematic.
• Interdisciplinary studies explore his relevance for contemporary issues such as the ethics of forgiveness, the nature of rational belief, and the compatibility of freedom with determinism or foreknowledge.

Despite divergent evaluations, Anselm is widely regarded as one of the formative thinkers of the Latin Christian tradition, whose work continues to provoke reflection on the relationship between faith, reason, and the pursuit of understanding.