SAINTS

.....who are they?

SAINTS – WHO ARE THEY

by Lahry Sibley

Being born into a Catholic family and raised in Catholic church, school, and seminary, there are many things I’ve pondered. Most were just accepted, until I began to read the Bible. Little by little, I began to question the lack of Biblical authenticity for so much of what I was trained to believe were “rock solid” doctrines. One of these teachings is all of this idolatrous fascination with dead people who Orthodoxy (pick your flavor) calls “saints”. From my perspective, I cannot find such a practice or definition in the Holy bible. So the natural question is, who started this “canonization” of “saints”, that orthodoxy elevates?

When did the church stop calling every believer a saint, like Scripture does, and start creating a spiritual aristocracy? And the historical record is surprisingly clear for anyone who cares to take a peek into the past.

Canonization didn’t come from the apostles. It didn’t come from Scripture. It didn’t come from the early church. It emerged centuries later, slowly, as the church drifted from its original simplicity.

In the beginning, every new creation born again believer was a saint. Even the Catholic source acknowledges this plainly: Scripture calls all Christians “saints” (hagios). There was no hierarchy. No special class. No spiritual elite. Just the called out ones.

The early church treasured the memory of martyrs, lost loved ones worthy of acknowledging their walk with CHRIST. But there was no formal process or thought of some intermediary status assigned to anyone. Local believers simply remembered those who died in and for Christ. But no canonization, and no spiritual aristocracy.

Enter Constantine, where the state married the “church”. Christianity then became legal and culturally powerful, the church began publicly honoring not just martyrs but also “confessors” people admired for holiness. But this was not a universal system.

According to the historical record: Popes began issuing official decrees of sainthood in the 900s. Before that, bishops handled local recognition. After that, Rome claimed exclusive authority. This is where the “canon”, the official list, emerges. This is where sainthood becomes a bureaucratic process instead of a biblical identity.

By the Middle (dark) Ages, canonization required investigations, proof of miracles, papal approval, legal procedures, and the like. Mind you, all of this is documented in the historical development of canonization. Yet none of it resembles the New Testament.

So who started the “canonization” system? Not YAHSHUA. Not the apostles. Not the early church. And certainly not Scripture.

It was a late medieval Roman development, beginning with local bishops but ultimately centralized by the papacy in the 10th century. In other words, Canonization is a human invention born from institutional power, not divine revelation.

So, I ask, and maybe you do too, “who came up with the idea of “praying to saints””? And the lighting of votive candles (for a price)? This was a slow move from the simplicity of the New Testament into layers of tradition, culture, and eventually commercial identity.

“Praying to saints” didn’t come from YAHSHUA or the apostles. The earliest clear evidence of Christians invoking saints, that is, asking departed believers to intercede shows up in the 3rd century, long after the New Testament era. Keep in mind now, that about 90% of the population across the board, were illiterate.

It wasn’t universal. It wasn’t formal. It wasn’t doctrinal. It was a developing custom, hegemony influenced by Jewish traditions of asking the righteous dead to pray. Apocryphal writings like 1 Enoch that describe angels hearing human petitions. Early Christian admiration for martyrs, etc. But none of this resembles the apostolic pattern of prayer, which is always to the Father, through the Son, in the Spirit.

Votive candles came later, and yes, money got involved.

The research results don’t directly address votive candles, but historically they emerge in late antiquity and the early Middle Ages, tied to lighting candles at martyrs’ tombs, symbolic offerings (as if our REDEEMER’s blood was not enough) and the growing idea that physical acts could “assist” prayers into producing responses of a divine nature.

Over time, churches began attaching monetary offerings to candle-lighting, not originally as a “price,” but as a donation that became institutionalized. And eventually? It became a revenue stream. The higher the donation, the more supposed effect the prayer would produce. I admit, this just irks me to no end. Not the memories of precious saints (all new creation new life believers), but traditions without any Biblical substance.

This institutionalization floated to the surface much later. By the Middle Ages, the Church had formalized intercession of saints, encouraged invocation, attached rituals, candles, shrines, and eventually codified the whole system at the Council of Trent in 1545

So whose devoted invention was this? Not CHRIST. Not the apostles. Not the early church.

It was a gradual human development, shaped by mainly by Jewish customs (old wine skins) early Christian martyr veneration, cultural practices of mostly illiterate people, institutional power, and eventually, economics

The earliest clear Christian evidence is 3rd century, and the full system wasn’t formalized until the 1500s. So my main concern is, that if all of this canonization etc is rooted in the institutions of men, who came up with this? Who began teaching the traditions of me and the commandment of YAHWEH? Because when prayer shifts from “Abba, Father…” to “Let me find a holy middleman…”, THE FIRE GOES OUT! And when devotion becomes something you can, even symbolically, the persecution stops and the institutional church no longer feels threatened.

According to Ecc 9 and other texts, all people, saints or not, sleep until the last day. The only exception I can find, is Rev 20:4-6. So why does the “church” take the position that these folks are currently aware and influential, including Mary of course. The New Testament clearly declares we have but one advocate with the FATHER. Catholics, Anglicans, Greek and Western Orthodox, Lutheran, all have “feast days” (whatever that is) for each day of the year, along with many other scatter brained schisms. It just boggles my mind how supposedly educated men duly ordained can support such a thing as this.

Scripture’s witness about the dead is remarkably consistent.

Ecclesiastes 9, Daniel 12, John 5, 1 Thessalonians 4 — all speak of the dead as asleep, awaiting resurrection. The New Testament never portrays the dead as conscious intermediaries, active influencers, prayer receivers, or spiritual agents we can contact.

And the New Testament is unambiguous about advocacy. “We have ONE Advocate with the Father — Jesus Christ the righteous.” Not one plus Mary. Not one plus the martyrs. Not one plus the “saints” of tradition. Just One.

My question still remains, why does the institutional church teach otherwise?

Not because of Scripture. Not because of apostolic teaching. Not because of the early church. The evidence is just NOT THERE. I have found that it comes from three slow drifts:

First, there’s the drift from resurrection hope to Greek philosophy. As Christianity spread into the Greco Roman world, many believers absorbed the Greek idea of the immortal soul, conscious, active, and separable from the body.

This was not Hebrew thinking. It was not apostolic thinking. But it became dominant. Once you accept that the dead are conscious, the door opens to praying to them, asking them to intercede, and imagining them as spiritually active.

Early Christians honored martyrs the way we honor heroes. But by the 3rd to 4th century, people began asking martyrs to “pray for us.” Not because Scripture taught it, but because suffering believers felt close to those who had died for Christ. Emotion became tradition. Tradition became doctrine.

This drift from simplicity to institutional power, in the Middle Ages, lead to relics, shrines, pilgrimages, votive candles, intercessory saints, Marian devotion, canonization, indulgences and the like. Every one of these practices grew out of culture, not Scripture. Easily packaged and marketed to the illiterate populace. And once the institution embraced them, they became untouchable.

So what are “feast days”? A “feast day” is simply a day assigned to honor a particular saint.

But here’s the uncomfortable truth. The entire system assumes the dead are conscious, active, and influential , which Scripture never teaches. It also assumes they hear prayers, they intercede, they can be honored liturgically, and that they have spiritual jurisdiction. None of this comes from the apostles.

So why do educated, ordained men support it? The “elite” who claim only the educated can understand and interpret scripture?

Because once a system becomes ancient, beautiful, and institutional, it becomes self authenticating. Hegemony. Tradition in full bloom. People stop asking “Is this biblical?” and start asking: “Is this traditional?” And tradition, once sanctified by time, becomes unquestionable.

I’m reacting to the same thing Jesus confronted in His day, “You nullify the word of God for the sake of your tradition.” It’s not that these men are stupid. It’s that they inherited a system that was already built, and questioning it feels like questioning the entire structure of faith. When the church traded resurrection hope for Greek immortality, biblical simplicity for institutional complexity, one Advocate for many intermediaries, Spirit led worship for liturgical machinery, the fire dimmed. The HOLY SPIRIT was quenched (HIS manifest presence) and persecution stopped. Political and positional power increased. And churchanity stopped being threatened.

Beloved, we still don’t need a “reformation”. HIS body never needs such. What we need is a restoration, back to the simplicity of New Creation life in HIM. Led and guided by the HOLY SPIRIT. Why? Because as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are children of God. And the rest of the religious world? Well?