The Beautiful Thread by Penelope Wilcock Page A

covered them – yet – in depth. Our studies this year have focused on the theology of the Eucharist. But we have discussed Ockham’s razor, Brother Robert, have we not?”
    â€œReally?” The bishop again; though a second voice murmuring, LePrique’s, urging a reminder. Evidently at this point Brother Robert was forgetting to smile. The bishop once more: “Tell me what you have learned of lex parsimoniae , then, Brother Robert – of Ockham’s razor.”
    â€œHe… it’s… I think… um… it’s about doing your best to keep things simple. Not complicating everything. Because a razor is narrow and sharp, and cuts through the – er – through the …” Yes. John could well imagine what Theo might originally have said. “He – Ockham – he thought that you could get in a muddle if you made too many assumptions. Better to start small.”
    â€œ Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem. ” Brother Cassian, having the temerity to interrupt, albeit quietly and with humility. He must have seen Robert struggling, and the approach to novitiate studies they were used to with Theo could better be described as a free-for-all than wait-until-you’re-spoken-to.
    â€œAha!” exclaimed his Lordship. “Go on, then – say more?”
    â€œIt means you don’t exceed what is necessary, in your thinking,” Brother Cassian explained. “That if you have two explanations, you should ditch the fancy one in favour of the plain one. Unless the fancy one is for some reason better. So, you take the best one, but always the simplest best one. Not try to choose something complicated just to show off and look clever. And you should assume things are just natural and straightforward unless you have reason to think otherwise. So if you hear a bump in the night from the next cell, you assume someone has fallen out of bed, not that they’re wrestling with an angel. Because it’s more likely, even if it could in principle be an angel.”
    â€œVery good,” approved his Lordship. “That’s about right. And what about Ockham’s theology of the Eucharist – either of you? Any of you?”
    â€œHe… he said…” – this voice belonged to the obsessively diligent Brother Felix, so John had good hopes what he was about to hear might well be correct – “that Christ’s body is truly contained in all of the host, and in all of its parts at once. That the reality of Christ present succeeds the humble nature of bread. There isn’t an interim stage when it’s both, when both natures somehow blend in together. It’s bread, then it’s the host of Christ’s presence.”
    â€œ Very good!” The bishop sounded impressed, though from what he could detect of Brainard’s murmuring, Brother Felix was falling down on the job of keeping his smile in place as well.
    â€œWhat else have you learned about the theology of the Eucharist? What does Quidort say – and Aquinas?”
    John put his hand to the door, thinking this could well be a good moment to interrupt, but paused as he heard Felix begin to speak again. “He – Quidort – did not accept the interpretation given by Aquinas, your Lordship. John Quidort spoke of the nature of the bread being not supplanted by the presence of Christ, but being drawn into the greater being of the Logos – the holy Word, the mystical presence of Christ who is there in all the cosmos, in us who make our communion with the living Christ, in the bread, in the body.”
    John saluted this with a silent cheer, and thought Theo must feel profoundly relieved and gratified to know that at least one of his lads had been listening. But when the bishop said, “And you, young man? What are your own beliefs about the Eucharist?” he judged this the right moment to cut in. He didn’t want any of his