Ellen G. White and Her Critics

A Distinguishing Mark

This apparent lack of harmony in discussions of Babylon seems to distinguish our writers through the years. The simple explanation is that at one moment the writers are thinking of the special application of Revelation 14:8; at the next moment, of the fact that Rome is nevertheless a most important part of Babylon, and will continue to be until the day of judgment. EGWC 328.6

An editorial in the The Review and Herald, December 9, 1851, reasons thus regarding the application of Revelation 14:8: EGWC 328.7

“God’s people, who heard the first angel’s message, and came out under the message of the second, were, prior to their coming out, in Babylon. Were they in the Catholic Church? And did they come out of that church? Certainly not. But we know that many thousands did come out of the Protestant Sects. As the Catholic Church has not morally fallen, being always about as low as it possibly could be, and as God’s people were not there, we say that it cannot be the Babylon mentioned by the second angel.”—Page 64. EGWC 328.8

But the editor reprinted in the same issue an article from The Voice of Truth, September, 1844, entitled “Come Out of Babylon,” which declared, in part: EGWC 329.1

“The mother represents the Catholic Church the eldest member of the family; and we believe the daughters symbolize the Protestant sects.... The ‘whole family’ most strikingly represents that city. Take the whole and the figure is perfect; leave out the children and it is imperfect.”—The Review and Herald, December 9, 1851, p. 58. (Italics his.) EGWC 329.2

We should remember, as we note the emphasis, first on one aspect and then on the other, that the Review and Herald writers were sometimes thinking of the claim made by Protestants in general, and by their former Millerite brethren, in particular, that Babylon signifies Rome exclusively. EGWC 329.3

The apparent conflict between the broader and the narrower view of Babylon that may properly be held at the same time is further indicated in this passage from an 1852 editorial entitled “Babylon“: EGWC 329.4

“If the term Babylon be applied to the Roman Catholic church alone, then we inquire, When did she morally fall? The fact that she has always been corrupt, and about as low as she possibly could be, forbids the application of this moral change, or fall, to that corrupt church. Again, Babylon, signifying ‘confusion, or mixture,’ cannot be applied to the Roman church, she being a unit.”—The Review and Herald, June 10, 1852, p. 21. EGWC 329.5