OK, I know you are waiting for me to say it. 
There is no place in the Scriptures that gives any direct mention of the invocation of the saints for intercessory prayer. There, I said it. I got it off my chest! 😯 So, why do I believe in the invocation of the saints?
Let me post a quote from the Book of Tobit. I know that it is not part of the Protestant Bible, nevertheless, it lets me bring up a historical note that you may not know. In Tobit 12, as everything is being summed up, it says:
Now therefore, when thou didst pray, and Sara thy daughter in law, I did bring the remembrance of your prayers before the Holy One: and when thou didst bury the dead, I was with thee likewise. And when thou didst not delay to rise up, and leave thy dinner, to go and cover the dead, thy good deed was not hid from me: but I was with thee. And now God hath sent me to heal thee and Sara thy daughter in law. I am Raphael, one of the seven holy angels, which present the prayers of the saints, and which go in and out before the glory of the Holy One.
Of course, you should see some parallels here with the scene in the Book of Revelation in which the angel brings the bowl of incense containing the prayers of the saints before the throne of God. Let me point out that the Book of Tobit was written a couple of hundred years before Christ, and was part of the Septuagint, which was the Bible used by Greek-speaking Christians. St. John would have certainly been aware of this passage as he was aware of the passages in the Books of Daniel and Ezekiel that are paralleled in the Revelation.
So, the idea of the prayers of the saints being presented before the throne of God through the mediation of angels is not just found in the New Testament, it was also part of Jewish thought before the time of Christ. Why am I belaboring this? It may surprise you to know that the invocation of holy ones is also part of Chasidic Jewish spirituality:
In modern times one of the greatest divisions in Jewish theology (hashkafa) is over the issue of whether one can beseech the help of a tzadik – an extremely righteous individual. The main conflict is over a practice of beseeching a tzadik who has already died to make intercession before the Almighty. This practice is common mainly among Chasidic Jews, but also found in varying degrees among other usually Chareidi communities. . . . Those Jews who support the use of intercessors claim that their beseeching of the tzadik is not prayer or worship. The conflict between the groups [within Judaism] is essentially over what constitutes prayer, worship, a mediator (melitz), and an agent (sarsur).
In other words, this whole argument over the invocation of saints is, uhm, very very very old. You catch a touch of that in the Book of Job, where Eliphaz says to Job, “Call now, if there be any that will answer thee; and to which of the saints wilt thou turn?” So, first, the invocation of the saints is not a return to Roman polytheism. Second, while not expressly stated as a command, there are certainly indications that angels, at least, may be invoked. Finally, the invocation of holy ones, is something that appears to have crossed over to Christianity from certain of the groups within Judaism.
In early Judaism, there was no clear theology of what happens after death. This is why there are these references to Sheol in the Psalms, and various Old Testament Scriptures that speak of shades and wonder about existence after death. Belief in an eternity with God grows throughout the Old Testament, but it is not until the New Testament that there is clarity about those who have died in Christ being with Him and being fully aware. It is at this time, and as the first generation dies, and people are martyred, that there emerges the conviction that those who are with Him are also able to hear us.
So, the reality? Invocation of the saints is Holy Tradition, but not really found in the Scriptures. Nevertheless, it was not simply the entrance of paganism into the Church, but rather the growth of an idea found within Judaism that did not grow until around the Maccabeean times among some within Judaism and that can still be found today within some of the groups of Judaism.
While I may not have convinced you about the invocation of the saints, I certainly hope that I have convinced you that it was not merely Roman paganism creeping into the Church.
===MORE TO COME===
Fr. Ernesto,
Tobit was part of the Septuagint? Not according to anything I’ve ever heard. A prime Protestant argument against the inclusion of inter-testamental books within canon is that not a single one of them were included in the Septuagint, nor were any of them referenced by Christ at anytime within Scripture.
As to what happens after death, it is interesting that Paul refers to people as being “asleep.” Revelation also notes beheaded saints asking God “how long?” If we’re perfected after death, then why the apparent impatience? Could it be that things between death and the resurrection are foggy and imprecise?
Hmm, you may wish to look at the Wikipedia article on the Septuagint as Tobit has always been part of it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Septuagint
Are you then saying that people in glory feel no emotions? That is a rather Greek philosophical view of things rather than Hebrew/Christian is it not? We claim that the person in glory is now fully holy but also fully a person.
Moreover, neither the souls under the altar, nor the twenty-four elders, nor the multitudes, nor Lazarus and Dives in the parable told by Jesus seem to be unaware and asleep do they? Look at the history of interpretation, and the idea that when St. Paul wrote asleep he meant anything other than “not truly dead, and will never be so because they have new life” is extremely modern. The ancient view was always that those who died in Christ were/are aware and with God. That is why the Lutheran Reformers did not argue against the idea of the intercession of the saints by arguing that “things between death and the resurrection are foggy and imprecise.”
In other words, this “foggy and imprecise” view is from AFTER the Reformation. That does not exactly commend it for belief, an interpretation that neither the Fathers nor the Reformers saw.
Thanks, I’ll look at the article. No, I’m not saying that they have no emotions, but merely speculating on some things, in response to the lack of precise theology in early Judaism. I think I place a stronger emphasis on the resurrection than does the average evangelical outlook in the grand scheme of things. I have heard often from evangelicals about “getting rid” of this body, and living in heaven (as if eternally floating around in some kind of etherial Casper the Ghost type of body), as opposed to the eternal kingdom with a real earth. It’s that interim period between death and resurrection that I have lost certainty about.
As an aside, did my original comment appear standoffish? If so, I apologize. I wasn’t quite satisfied with my words.
Oh, I agree about the body. Those in glory may be aware, but they are, in some sense, incomplete. We were created to be incarnate. And, no, I did not see you as standoffish.