在多瑪斯主義傳統中，所有的學者都堅持天主不是倫理之 惡的原因，祂只是允許了惡。由於天主允許惡的問題牵涉形上學、預 定論、恩寵學說等等神哲學問題，從現代早期至20紀上半葉，多瑪 斯學派内部對於天主以何種方式允許惡的爭論不斷。馬里旦與尼古 拉之間關於此問題的爭論頗具代表性。馬里旦堅守天主的全善，以天 主的後繼允許來詮釋天主對惡的允許，而尼古拉以天主作為超越性 的第一因為基礎，把天主對惡的允許視為一種前導允許命令。雖然兩 者採取不同的詮釋，但是他們都堅守天主的全能與全善，以及天主允 許惡並摒棄犯罪的人這兩端。他們的嘗試體現了多瑪斯主義中整合 信仰與理性的傳統。

It is commonly held by Thomists that God is the cause of all things while he is not the cause of moral evil. Since the question of how God permits evil relates to some key philosophical and theological issues, it caused unceasing internal controversies in Thomism from early modern period to the first half of the twenties century. The exchange between two French Thomists Maritain and Nicolas is a typical case of these scholastic controversies. Maritain emphsised God’s ‘absolute innocence’ by proposing God’s consequent permissive decree, while Nicolas sought the metaphysical coherence in the antecedent permissive decree. Although Maritain and Nicolas stand against each other, both of them hold two ends of the Catholic doctrine on God’s permission of evil: God’s divine causality and human freedom. In their endeavours, we can find the Thomistic tradition of harmonising reason and faith.