satisfaction by vicarious sacrifice was understood, even if dimly at times and often stated obscurely.
In other words, the evangelical doctrine was never a novelty imposed upon the scriptures. In
every age it was at least partially understood. It is not, as some claim, an invention of the former
Archbishop of Canterbury.
passed down to later generations the great idea of objective, finished accomplishment--a done deal
as my lawyer says. For another he saw that scripture roots both "the sending in the likeness of
sinful flesh" and "for sin" in the very nature of God. Anselm found both holiness and justice
(righteousness) taking no back seat to His love. Further, he appears to be about the first of the
medieval scholastics to become aware of the incompleteness of the ancient creeds with respect to
Christ's work of redemption. His proposal of vicarious satisfaction of penal justice toward the
infinite majesty of God, though needing some qualification, gave rational coherence to a theology
of atonement. Evangelical theology has improved on Anselm but not rejected his
accomplishments.
it is evident that if his views and experience, as exhibited in the Cur Deus Homo? could have become those
would not have been needed . . . . But the soteriology of Anselm, though exerting no little
influence through his immediate pupils, did not pass into the church at large. (W. G. T. Shedd,
The History of Christian Doctrine II, p. 216)
This was because Britain and Normandy, where Anselm served, were then on the perimeter of
christendom. The city clergymen of Europe and the Roman buereaucrats were neither very pious
nor interested in thorough going theological reflection.
inquiry, the dawning of a new era after five hundred years of stagnation an
d darkness." (Shedd, Op. Cit., p. 273) Bromiley claims Anselm's tract was "epoch making." (G.
W. Bromiley, Historical Theology, p. 177)
the Apostle's Creed, the Nicene Creed and the Athanasian Creed. Yet, little formulation of