At work I have a colleague who asks me, again and again, why it is that God did not create human beings incapable of sinning. He is obviously far from satisfied with my answers, and I can't blame him. What would you say? You must have been asked the question.
Cur Deus Homo has a brief aside about the question. In contrast to the rest of the book this section is as clear as mud to me. Nevertheless Anselm's answer manages to shut up his dialogue partner...
Boso: given that God is capable of creating such a man, why did he not make the angels and the first two human beings such that they would likewise be both incapable of sinning and worthy of praise for their righteousness?
Anselm: Do you understand what you are saying?
Boso: It seems to me that I understand it, and that is why I am asking why he did not make them like this.
Anselm: This was because it was neither right nor possible for it to be brought about that any one of them should be identical with God, as is the case, so we are saying, with this man [Jesus, who is righteous and incapable of sin 'independently']. And if you ask why he does not bring this about for as many such human beings as there are persons of God, or why he did not at least do it for one of them, I answer that reason did not at all demand that this should be done: rather, since God does nothing irrationally, it prohibited this.
Boso: I am ashamed at having asked this question.
(Cur Deus Homo, Book 2, Chap 10)
Now I don't want to shut up my friend so completely, but want I do want him to be pointed to him who does make us incapable of sin. So I'm not ashamed to ask such a question of my intelligent readers, in the hope of fresh insight.
