This task is about creating an unanswerable question based on a given passage. Construct a question that looks relevant to the given context but is unanswerable. Following are a few suggestions about how to create unanswerable questions:
(i) create questions which require satisfying a constraint that is not mentioned in the passage
(ii) create questions which require information beyond what is provided in the passage in order to answer
(iii) replace an existing entity, number, date mentioned in the passage with other entity, number, date and use it in the question
(iv) create a question which is answerable from the passage and then replace one or two words by their antonyms or insert/remove negation words to make it unanswerable.
One example is below.
Q: Passage: In 1763, Spain traded Florida to the Kingdom of Great Britain for control of Havana, Cuba, which had been captured by the British during the Seven Years' War. It was part of a large expansion of British territory following the country's victory in the Seven Years' War. Almost the entire Spanish population left, taking along most of the remaining indigenous population to Cuba. The British soon constructed the King's Road connecting St. Augustine to Georgia. The road crossed the St. Johns River at a narrow point, which the Seminole called Wacca Pilatka and the British named "Cow Ford", both names ostensibly reflecting the fact that cattle were brought across the river there.
A: Who owned Cuba after the Eight Years War?
Rationale: This question appears to be relevant to the passage as both involves words such as 'Cuba' and 'War' which also exist in the passage. The passage mentions that "after the war, almost the entire Spanish population left, taking along most of the remaining indigenous population to Cuba". This information is not sufficient to conclude that which country owned cuba.
Q: Passage: Until 1917, it was possible for someone who was not a priest, but only in minor orders, to become a cardinal (see "lay cardinals", below), but they were enrolled only in the order of cardinal deacons. For example, in the 16th century, Reginald Pole was a cardinal for 18 years before he was ordained a priest. In 1917 it was established that all cardinals, even cardinal deacons, had to be priests, and, in 1962, Pope John XXIII set the norm that all cardinals be ordained as bishops, even if they are only priests at the time of appointment. As a consequence of these two changes, canon 351 of the 1983 Code of Canon Law requires that a cardinal be at least in the order of priesthood at his appointment, and that those who are not already bishops must receive episcopal consecration. Several cardinals aged over 80 or close to it when appointed have obtained dispensation from the rule of having to be a bishop. These were all appointed cardinal-deacons, but one of them, Roberto Tucci, lived long enough to exercise the right of option and be promoted to the rank of cardinal-priest.
A:
What was possible for someone to become who was not a priest, but only in major orders?