‘According to Anselm, why did God become human?’
In his two-part work, ‘Cur Deus Homo,’ (‘Why God became man’) Anselm establishes the overwhelming
nature of human sin created the ‘necessity’ that the one bringing salvation for humanity was both divine
and human, in one person. (Necessity here is in quotes since God is never under the compulsion of
necessity, rather the necessity Anselm refers to is that of the unchangeability of God’s honour. 1) Using
feudal language, Anselm outlines that human sin is an irreparable debt to God, with God refusal to allow
His creation to be forever tainted by sin indicating his merciful love and forgiveness. This hierarchical
relationship with God expresses the need for the one bringing salvation to be divine, since repayment must
honour God, yet the repayer must be also greater in power than humanity, since their sin is one that they
are unable to repay. Additionally, the salvific figure must also be human, as the debt owed to God is a
human debt, as is the choice to sin. Overall, in examining the traits of human sin, Anselm’s feudal language,
and the necessity conditions of the salvific figure, it will become clear that God became human to restore
worldly order out of love.
Anselm’s method of demonstrating why God became man is key to the effectiveness of his argument. He
establishes his hypothesis through meeting the objections of unbelievers in a question-and-answer format,
known as a dialogue, a method shared by others such as Plato, making hypotheses easier to follow. In ‘Cur
Deus Homo,’ Anselm uses the character of Boso as his opposition, who acts as the unbeliever, throwing
questions at the other character, Anselm, allowing Anselm to strengthen his argument by highlighting the
flaws in the unbelievers’ position. Although Boso does sometimes break out of character, this use of a
dialogue format is effective for Anselm, as it allows him to work through common criticisms used by
unbelievers in relation to human sin, God’s power, and the Incarnation, leaving less room for later criticisms
of his argument to arise. Additionally, it indicates that Anselm is intentionally adapting his writing style for a
conscious purpose:2 to allow readers to first understand what Christ must do and why, before examining
what Christ must be.3 Thus, in first focusing on soteriology, Anselm establishes the conditions in which
Christ is to act, before examining the logic around God becoming man, creating a cohesive and supported
line of reasoning.
Key to his focus on developing a soteriology in the first book of ‘Cur Deus Homo,’ is Anselm’s exploration of
the nature of human sin and the greatness of its weight, as well as the conditions under which it emerged.
Being one of his first focuses in the book, it provides a stable foundation on which Anselm later builds his
theory of why God became human. For Anselm, everything in the world is defined in teleological terms, 4 as
being created to fulfil a purpose established by God. For humanity, this purpose is to honour God, and thus,
Anselm defines sin as the autonomous decision to go against God’s will and dishonour Him. It is key to note
here that nothing can take away from God’s honour, since God is the greatest and most powerful. Rather, a
human’s decision to sin and thus dishonour God demonstrates human corruption, a deliberate disruption
of order, and a lack of willingness to be subordinate to God.5 The teleological ordering of the universe
suggests that there is nothing humans can do to repay God for their wrong, since by in doing good, they are
1
Davies, Brian and Evans, G.R. Anselm: The Major Works. Oxford University Press: Oxford. Pg319.
2
Evans, G. R. ‘Anselm’. Continuum: London. 2001. Pg72.
3
Visser, Sandra, and Williams, Thomas. ’Anselm.’ Oxford University Press: Oxford. 2009. Pg213.
4
Brown, David. ‘Anselm on Atonement.’ The Cambridge Companion to Anselm. Cambridge University
Press: Cambridge. 2004. Pg292.
5
Davies and Evans. Anselm: The Major Works. Pg288. Davies and Evans. Anselm: The Major Works.
Pg288.
In his two-part work, ‘Cur Deus Homo,’ (‘Why God became man’) Anselm establishes the overwhelming
nature of human sin created the ‘necessity’ that the one bringing salvation for humanity was both divine
and human, in one person. (Necessity here is in quotes since God is never under the compulsion of
necessity, rather the necessity Anselm refers to is that of the unchangeability of God’s honour. 1) Using
feudal language, Anselm outlines that human sin is an irreparable debt to God, with God refusal to allow
His creation to be forever tainted by sin indicating his merciful love and forgiveness. This hierarchical
relationship with God expresses the need for the one bringing salvation to be divine, since repayment must
honour God, yet the repayer must be also greater in power than humanity, since their sin is one that they
are unable to repay. Additionally, the salvific figure must also be human, as the debt owed to God is a
human debt, as is the choice to sin. Overall, in examining the traits of human sin, Anselm’s feudal language,
and the necessity conditions of the salvific figure, it will become clear that God became human to restore
worldly order out of love.
Anselm’s method of demonstrating why God became man is key to the effectiveness of his argument. He
establishes his hypothesis through meeting the objections of unbelievers in a question-and-answer format,
known as a dialogue, a method shared by others such as Plato, making hypotheses easier to follow. In ‘Cur
Deus Homo,’ Anselm uses the character of Boso as his opposition, who acts as the unbeliever, throwing
questions at the other character, Anselm, allowing Anselm to strengthen his argument by highlighting the
flaws in the unbelievers’ position. Although Boso does sometimes break out of character, this use of a
dialogue format is effective for Anselm, as it allows him to work through common criticisms used by
unbelievers in relation to human sin, God’s power, and the Incarnation, leaving less room for later criticisms
of his argument to arise. Additionally, it indicates that Anselm is intentionally adapting his writing style for a
conscious purpose:2 to allow readers to first understand what Christ must do and why, before examining
what Christ must be.3 Thus, in first focusing on soteriology, Anselm establishes the conditions in which
Christ is to act, before examining the logic around God becoming man, creating a cohesive and supported
line of reasoning.
Key to his focus on developing a soteriology in the first book of ‘Cur Deus Homo,’ is Anselm’s exploration of
the nature of human sin and the greatness of its weight, as well as the conditions under which it emerged.
Being one of his first focuses in the book, it provides a stable foundation on which Anselm later builds his
theory of why God became human. For Anselm, everything in the world is defined in teleological terms, 4 as
being created to fulfil a purpose established by God. For humanity, this purpose is to honour God, and thus,
Anselm defines sin as the autonomous decision to go against God’s will and dishonour Him. It is key to note
here that nothing can take away from God’s honour, since God is the greatest and most powerful. Rather, a
human’s decision to sin and thus dishonour God demonstrates human corruption, a deliberate disruption
of order, and a lack of willingness to be subordinate to God.5 The teleological ordering of the universe
suggests that there is nothing humans can do to repay God for their wrong, since by in doing good, they are
1
Davies, Brian and Evans, G.R. Anselm: The Major Works. Oxford University Press: Oxford. Pg319.
2
Evans, G. R. ‘Anselm’. Continuum: London. 2001. Pg72.
3
Visser, Sandra, and Williams, Thomas. ’Anselm.’ Oxford University Press: Oxford. 2009. Pg213.
4
Brown, David. ‘Anselm on Atonement.’ The Cambridge Companion to Anselm. Cambridge University
Press: Cambridge. 2004. Pg292.
5
Davies and Evans. Anselm: The Major Works. Pg288. Davies and Evans. Anselm: The Major Works.
Pg288.
