Protestantism

The First Vatican Council in 1870, defined the infallibility of the pope, in Pastor Aeternalis.First of all, chapter 6 says:

9. Therefore, faithfully adhering to the tradition received from the beginning of the christian faith, to the glory of God our savior, for the exaltation of the Catholic religion and for the salvation of the christian people, with the approval of the Sacred Council, we teach and define as a divinely revealed dogmathat when the Roman Pontiff speaks EX CATHEDRA, that is, when, in the exercise of his office as shepherd and teacher of all Christians, in virtue of his supreme apostolic authority, he defines a doctrine concerning faith or morals to be held by the whole Church, he possesses, by the divine assistance promised to him in blessed Peter, that infallibility which the divine Redeemer willed his Church to enjoy in defining doctrine concerning faith or morals. Therefore, such definitions of the Roman Pontiff are of themselves, and not by the consent of the Church, irreformable. [My emphasis in bold]

On this, Bishop Geoffrey Robinson (Confronting Power and Sex in the Catholic Church) asks how a council can infallibly declare the infallibility of the pope unless we assume in advance that the council was itself infallible. In the absence of infallibility on the part of the First Vatican Council, the pronouncement in Pastor Aeternalis is no more than an opinion.

.

In chapter 4 of the same document, the council appears to have limited that infallibility, by limiting the pope to jealously guarding and explaining what was handed down through the apostles, and not the ability to disclose a new doctrine by revelation:

6. For the Holy Spirit was promised to the successors of Peter not so that they might, by his revelation, make known some new doctrine, but that, by his assistance, they might religiously guard and faithfully expound the revelation or deposit of faith transmitted by the apostles.

The council may not have intended to have one clause limit the other in this way. The pope's pronouncement on the Assumption of the Virgin Mary was certainly not handed down through the apostles, so even if the pope is indeed infallible on certain matters Robinson believes this clause means that the pope was assuming an infallibility he did not have in this case.

The First Vatican Council could only speak for the Catholic Church and, of couse, Papal infallibility applies only to the Catholic Church. It is not recognised by the other churches, which accept the Bible as the only infallible guide on faith and morals, nor is it true for non-Christian religious beliefs.

In summary:

1. the council taught and declared that the pope is infallible when speaking ex cathedra on faith and morals, but apparently also limited his authority to matters of faith transmitted by the apostles;

2. there is reasonable doubt whether Catholics really ought to hold the pope to be infallible; and

3. there is further doubt as to whether the pope ought to be regarded as infallible when making pronouncements other than to expound teachings transmitted through the apostles, such as on the Assumption of Mary.

4. Papal authority is limited to the teachings of the Catholic Church, within the Catholic Church.

The original legend of Solomon provides so little evidence of any wisdom on the part of Solomon, but 1 Kings 10:1 says that the queen of Sheba came and asked hard questions, thereby proving that Solomon did indeed possess great wisdom: "And when the queen of Sheba heard of the fame of Solomon concerning the name of the LORD, she came to prove him with hard questions ..." She said that his wisdom and prosperity exceeded the fame which she had heard.

Lester L Grabbe (Ancient Israel: What Do We Know and How Do We Know It?) examines the biblical story of Solomon and says that finds it difficult to discover much that is likely to be historical. He says the episodes around the queen of Sheba were quite late additions invented by the post-Deuteronomic redactor. It is a romantic story, but the reality is that there was no queen of Sheba and there were no hard questions.

Another Answer:

The Bible notes it was the Queen of Sheba (Saba), meaning 'Host of Heaven' or Peace, and is a country in what is now Yemen, in the southwest corner of Arabia where the Red Sea meets the Indian Ocean. There are several Arabic writings that contain 22 of her 'riddles' (hard questions) she used to test Solomon's famous wisdom (The Targum Sheni, Midrash Mischle, and Midrash Hachefez). This appears to have been a standard exercise of people of power (see Judges 14:12,18 of Samson). Additionally, there are several sources dating back to 715 BC recording the ancient land of Sheba and a simply 'google' search will reveal them to all interested.

A compilation of Solomon's wise sayings is in the Book of Ecclesiastes.

It is uncertain what the question means, but the Lutheran church began in Australia with the arrival of the first group of German settlers escaping from persecution of King Friedrich Wilhelm in Prussia.

21 German Lutheran refugees arrived on the ship 'Bengalee' on 18 November 1838, followed two days later by the main group on the 'Prince George'. They first settled at the town of Klemzig in South Australia.

Anglican Catholic Answer!

Henry didn't of course turn England protestant or turn protestant himself.

What Henry did, for whatever reason, was to query the right of the papacy to interfere in another bishop's see! Pointing out that whoever did so contravened the Canons of Nicea and broke the basic rules of the Church!

To adhere to the rules of the Ecumenical Councils is not to become protestant, to abandon the teaching of the Church is to become a heretic! Henry abandoned no rules or teaching!

from The Catechism of the Catholic Church, second edition, English translation 1994

2089 Incredulity is the neglect of revealed truth or the willful refusal to assent to it. "Heresy is the obstinate post-baptismal denial of some truth which must be believed with divine and catholic faith, or it is likewise an obstinate doubt concerning the same; apostasy is the total repudiation of the Christian faith; schism is the refusal of submission to the Roman Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him." (Codex Iuris Canonici, canon 751: emphasis added.)

from Modern Catholic Dictionary by John A. Hardon, S.J. Doubleday & Co., Inc. Garden City, NY 1980

Heresy. Commonly refers to a doctrinal belief held in opposition to the recognized standards of an establish system of thought. Theologically it means an opinion at variance with the authorized teachings of any church, notably the Christian, and especially when this promotes separation from the main body of faithful believers.

In the Roman Catholic Church, heresy has a very specific meaning. Anyone who, after receiving baptism, while remaining nominally a Christian, pertinaciously denies or doubts any of the truths that must be believed with divine and Catholic faith is considered a heretic. Accordingly four elements must be verified to constitute formal heresy; previous valid baptism, which need not have been in the Catholic Church; external profession of still being a Christian, otherwise a person becomes an apostate; outright denial or positive doubt regarding a truth that the Catholic Church has actually proposed as revealed by God; and the disbelief must be morally culpable, where a nominal Christian refuses to accept what he knows is a doctrinal imperative.

Objectively, therefore, to become a heretic in the strict canonical sense and be excommunicated from the faithful, one must deny or question a truth that is taught not merely on the authority of the Church but on the word of God revealed in the Scriptures or sacred tradition. Subjectively a person must recognize his obligation to believe. If he acts in good faith, as with most persons brought up in non-Catholic surroundings, the heresy is only material and implies neither guilt nor sin against faith. (Etym. Latin haeresis, from the Greek hairesis, a taking, choice, sect, heresy.)

St. Paul

Another answer:

All of Jesus' "chosen twelve" apostles contributed to the work of the early church (with the exception of Judas, of course, who killed himself and was replaced by a disciple named Matthias, as recorded at the end of chapter one of Acts of the Apostles).

James, John and Peter labored particularly in Jerusalem and its surroundings (Judea, Galilee, Samaria), working mainly (though not exclusively) with the Jews.

Paul, called to be an apostle by the resurrected Jesus (in visions), was specifically commissioned to preach the gospel to the Gentiles as well as the Jews.

Men like Barnabas (Acts 14:14), Timothy and Titus can also be considered "apostles of the early church," as "apostle" means, "a delegate, a messenger, one sent forth with orders."