Martin Luther, John Dee, and Pope Paul III.
The Protestants arrived on the historical scene in the 16th century by declaring the papal authority in Rome the Antichrist.
This was a turbulent period. End times propaganda was in the air. The European public's susceptibility to religious extremism was at an all time high. Theological learning was becoming deinstitutionalized, and ancient manuscripts and philosophical books were being translated into common languages.
An excerpt from, "Martin Luther’s Views on the Antichrist" by Dennis Pettibone, Journal of the Adventist Theological Society, 2007:
If Protestantism owes its very existence to Luther’s conviction that the papacy was the Antichrist, it might be instructive to inquire why Luther held this view and under what circumstances he came to this conclusion. We will see that he came to this view slowly and reluctantly, driven by historical circumstances and theological reflection. We will also briefly note the comparable views of other Protestant Reformers and their predecessors. Looking at the idea that the papacy is the Antichrist of prophecy in its historical context might give us a rational basis for evaluating it.We will focus primarily on Luther because it was his views on the subject that triggered the Protestant Reformation. However, we should note that Luther was far from the first person to hold this view. Luther himself credited John Huss with being the first to call the pope an Antichrist. Huss did indeed consider the Pope to be the Antichrist, but he was not the first to do so, nor was his mentor, John Wycliffe, although Wycliffe and at least some of his Lolland followers, including Sir John Oldcastle, held this belief. This idea also circulated among the Waldensians, the Albigensians, and the Fraticelli, a group of Franciscans with more regard for the rule of St. Francis than for papal authority.. . .Martin Luther was probably unaware of the previous attacks on the papacy when, in 1517, he drafted his 95 Theses. If he had been, he would have been unsympathetic. At the time he regarded John Huss as a heretic. His target was not the papacy; it was a greedy Dominican monk named Johann Tetzel who was distorting Catholic doctrine by exaggerating the benefits of indulgences. Luther had no intention of splitting the church: he was only trying to protect his parishioners.Enraged, Tetzel made sure that Rome knew what was happening. This set in motion a chain of events that led to a summons for Luther to appear before a papal representative. It also led to a theological attack on Luther’s position by Sylvester Cardinal Prierias, the papal court’s chief theologian. Prierias wrote, “He who does not accept the doctrine of the Church of Rome and pontiff of Rome as an infallible rule of faith, from which the Holy Scriptures, too, draw their strength, is a heretic.” Furthermore, “Whoever says that the Church of Rome may not do what it is actually doing in the matter of indulgences is a heretic.” Prierias had transformed the debate from a question of procedure to one of authority.
An excerpt from, "John Dee's Conversations with Angels: Cabala, Alchemy, and the End of Nature" by Deborah E. Harkness, Cambridge University Press, 1999, Pg. 136 - 139:
Today we tend to group all beliefs that the world is ending under the rubric of "apocalypticism." In the early modern period, however, apocalyptic expression fell into several different categories: apocalypse, prophecy, and eschatology. Neither the interest in the final days of the earth nor the response to that interest was homogeneous. While some speculation and divination was tolerated, other opinions met with considerable resistance. Still, the belief that the end of the world was approaching continued to flourish well into the seventeenth century, where it took on a new cast within shifting social, cultural, religious, and economic contexts. The lines dividing apocalypticism, prophecy, and eschatology were never so clearly demarcated as is suggested here, but it is important to distinguish among them because the distinctions can help us to understand why Dee was initially "well received" by monarchs and church officials yet later turned away when his angelic revelations became increasingly apocalyptic.An apocalypse was a particular genre of speculation about the final days whose authors claimed to have received a direct revelation from a divine agency - either God, an angel, or a saint. Apocalypses were usually communicated to the world through prophets, as in the case of Girolamo Savonarola. Prophecy was a dangerous business in early modern Europe; Savonarola's public execution in Florence in 1498 reminded everyone from common astrologer to exalted natural philosopher of the risks implicit in making predictions about the future that claimed to rest on divine directives. The interpretation of signs of the End of Days, or eschatology, was different from either apocalypticism or prophecy. Most apocalyptic writings in early modern Europe were not actually apocalypses but eschatologies.Eschatologists like Gabriel Harvey who commented on natural disasters claimed no privileged and direct line of communication from God but instead pointed out the importance of natural signs. Early modern eschatalogical texts attempted to fit recent events into preexisting canons of apocalyptic signs, though some advanced radically new interpretations. Discussing and analyzing signs of the earth's predicted demise was a popular industry in medieval and early modern Europe. The list of pamphlets and books on the new star, on the grand conjunction, and on hosts of natural marvels like monstrous births or rains of blood suggests that anyone might have his views on the subject published. Presses throughout Europe issued one apocalyptic interpretation of contemporary events after another to meet the seemingly insatiable demands of readers. Sheltco à Geveren's Of the Ende of this Worlde, and the Seconde Commyng of Christ, for example, was quickly translated by Thomas Rogers from its original Dutch into English and reprinted in London five times between 1577 and 1589. Printing facilitated the formulation of a widely recog nized canon of eschatological signs ranging from natural and supernatural events to military skirmishes, all of which mounted with alarming speed as the fifteenth century moved into the sixteenth. No longer was knowledge of surprising or unusual events confined to their immediate locales by the limits of word-of-mouth transmission. What this signified in practical terms was that the Catholic church was unable to control the spread of prophetic messages and guide their interpretation. At the Fifth Lateran Council convened in 1512, the Church officially renounced the popular enthusiasm for eschatological speculations that were being printed, circulated, and discussed by those outside its authority.Just as the printing press was challenging Catholic authorities in the cities of Europe, so the Reformation (whose main proponents made good use of the new printing technology) was establishing alternative forms of worship. The Reformation of the church, coming as it did in the midst of a series of eschatalogical signs, was given a weighty role in Protestant accounts of the world's progress toward redemption. The Catholic church responded with its own program of reform, claiming sole responsibility for leading humanity into the next spiritual age of restitution and rebirth. The iubilee vear of 1600 became the focus for Catholic eschatologists. Among the Protestants, the exact time of the Second Coming was more imprecise; many thought that God might begin the next age between 1583 and 1588. This time frame was particularly potent because of its proximity to the great conjunction of 1583, and because prophecies often referred to miraculous events as happening 1,558 years after Christ's birth.
