According to our view, there is no rational creature which is not capable both of good and evil. But it does not follow, that because we say there is no nature which may not admit evil, we therefore maintain that every nature has admitted evil, i.e., has become wicked. As we may say that the nature of every man admits of his being a sailor, but it does not follow from that, that every man will become so; or, again, it is possible for every one to learn grammar or medicine, but it is not therefore proved that every man is either a physician or a grammarian; so, if we say that there is no nature which may not admit evil, it is not necessarily indicated that it has done so. For, in our view, not even the devil himself was incapable of good; but although capable of admitting good, he did not therefore also desire it, or make any effort after virtue. (Book I, Chapter 8, Part 3)

I agree and would take the logic even further.

Just as the best physician will occasionally and unintentionally make an error, so the best of mortals will err.

Just as the best grammarian will occasionally -- even intentionally -- err, so the best of mortals may consciously choose error.

And despite our errors we are loved.