132. To Abbot Robert.
The Letters of St. Anselm
132. TO ABBOT ROBERT.
In answering a query of Abbot Robert Anselm distinguishes between the moral values of intention and deed.
TO HIS LORD AND BROTHER, THE REVEREND ABBOT ROBERT1:
BROTHER ANSELM, STYLED ABBOT OF BEC, WISHING HIM
PROSPERITY FOR THIS LIFE AND FELICITY IN THE LIFE TO COME.
ANSWERING YOUR REVERENCE about the matter on which you deigned to consult my lowliness through your son William, I would wish to propose examples and authori ties; but hindered by his haste and my engagements, as he can witness, I am barely allowed to state plainly the truth of the matter in question.
Every prudent Christian knows full well that, just as some one prevented from doing the good deed he intended who later rejoices at having been unable to carry out the good he had intended, is not to be praised for having carried out the good he had planned, in the same way someone who is not permitted to do a wicked deed he had planned, and then rejoices at not having given in to his lust, is in no way to be judged free of the guilt he had intended. If anyone with the intention of committing a crime dies in this state, he is to be judged for it. There is, however, a great difference between someone whom the anger of the supreme Judge abandons even on the verge of an evil deed and someone whom grace leads back from the precipice to the good in tention of doing service. Greatly to be reproached, therefore, is anyone who tries to assign guilt in equal measure to those whose wicked wills Divine Wisdom disposes to direct quite differently. For anyone who either stumbles while carry ing out an action or is abandoned to a malicious intention is known as a criminal, but not someone who is neither thrown headlong into the work of malice nor dragged down by perverse intention. The first is saved so that he can give thanks, rejoicing; the other is lost so that he must ask par don grieving. From this it is certain that the former will