P
PickyPicky
Guest
Whatever the Cardinal or the Pope thought, Dr Runcie’s letter was clearly, and contrary to what you have said, couched in theological, not sociological, terms. Such is obvious to anyone reading it. The Cardinal responded, arguing in theological terms for the Catholic position, as one would expect. I don’t see why you should think the Pope and the Cardinal differed on this, They both, of course, argued the Catholic theology, which I quite understand a Catholic is expected dutifully to accept.That was Cardinal Willibrands opinion, Pope St John Paul’s understanding of the response was something different
I have no standing in this argument about women’s ordination, and wouldn’t attempt an opinion on it. But you seem anxious not simply to establish that the pro-women’s-ordination position is theologically wrong, but that it is not possible to make any theological argument for it at all. Which is daft, given that many theologians take the position (wrongly, perhaps) that women’s ordination is theologically acceptable.