Should Churches With "Saint" in their Name Change their Church Names?

For a long time, I have been pondering whether it is appropriate to have the name "Saint" applied to a church or Christian-based organization. My answer is, "no, it should not be." 

The word "saint" has its origins in the idea of holiness. For Israel, God is the Holy One. In the Old Testament, it is also applied to God's people as "holy people" or "saints" (e.g., Ps 16:3; Isa 62:12; 63:18). It is applied to the collective and not individuals.

By the time we come to the New Testament, the term is applied to Jesus as "the Holy One" a few times (Mark 1:24 and parallels; John 6:69: Acts 2:27; 13:25; 1 John 2:20; Rev 3:7) and God (Rev 16:5). Otherwise, where people are concerned, it is used for God's holy people as a collective about sixty times (e.g., Matt 27:52; Acts 9:13; Rom 1:7; 1 Cor 1:2; 2 Cor 1:1; Eph 1:1; Phil 1:1; Col 1:2; 1 Thess 3:13; 1 Tim 5:10; Phlm 1:5; Heb 6:10; Jude 3; Rev 5:8). So, the term "saint" in Christian thought applies to all Christians, without exception. 

However, over time, it became customary to apply the term "saint" to particular individuals who have done amazing things for God. Indeed, there is a strict process in the Roman Catholic Church to be canonized as a saint (e.g., https://catholiceducation.org/resources/the-process-of-becoming-a-saint). Where "saint" language is used in this elitist way, it divides Christians into two groups: the great (the saints) and the rest (the non-saints). It creates elitism in the church.

Now the NT equally rejects elitism. This is seen in the memorable Galatians 3:28, where Paul declares an end to the great social elitisms of race (Jew over gentile, racism), gender (male over female, patriarch), and social status (master over slave, and any other form of elitism). There is simply no room for elitism in the church.

Jesus, too, was not interested in elitism. He verbally challenged the Jewish elite for their oppression and hypocrisy. He was the friend of sinners, hung out at the margins, healed the sick, exorcized the demonized, fed the poor, and welcomed those rejected from high society. He summoned us to a new world in which all Christians are one and on the same level. He set the agenda for modern western egalitarianism.

Sadly, the church perpetuates elitism. Not only do we have the clergy-laity split in many churches, but we perpetuate the nonsense of the sainthood of the special in the names of many of our churches. This is unbiblical and an affront to the gospel. 

Strangely and ironically, the only church that uses Saint correctly is a church considered heretical by most Christians, the Mormons, "The Church of the Latter-Day Saints." In the NT, the latter days began at the resurrection of Jesus, and we are in them until Christ's return. They also recognize all in the church are saints. 

So, with all of this in mind, I would urge all leaders of churches with the name "Saint ..." to change the name of the church to something that reflects Jesus our Lord and his inclusion of all people regardless of status. I believe if the Apostles, Paul, and other writers of the NT were here to observe our flawed us of sainthood, they would join me. The church is about God, Father, Son, and Spirit. Jesus is our Lord. The Spirit is in all believers without prejudice. We are all equal before God. All are saints. Is it not time for us to reflect the gospel appropriately as we present ourselves to the world?