Eric Nelson claims that political liberals following in John Rawls's footsteps are unwittingly participating in the theodicy debate. Luck egalitarians, institutional egalitarians, and left libertarians all fail to offer convincing arguments for egalitarianism, in part due to the theological premises that are basic to—though unrecognized in—their arguments. Calls for egalitarian redistribution from political liberals are actually veiled Pelagian arguments. With Nelson's fascinating book (and with Katrina Forrester's equally brilliant genealogy of political liberalism) we appear to be in a post-Rawlsian moment.
Nelson defines a Pelagian as a rationalist who so prizes human “metaphysical freedom” that it vindicates God's justice in the face of an unjust world (3). Freedom plays a crucial role in addressing the two versions of theodicy. On the one hand, we have the issue of saving Christian Orthodoxy's understanding of God's punitive justice in the face of human sin. On the other hand lies God's retributive justice...