The term ‘Saint’ traverses the depth-psychology corpus along three distinct axes that rarely converge but together define its psychological weight. First, William James subjects saintliness to a rigorous pragmatic audit in ‘The Varieties of Religious Experience,’ treating the saint as a psychological type whose characteristic features — self-surrender, charity, ascetic strength, and inner excitement — must be evaluated by their social fruits rather than their supernatural claims. James explicitly stages a confrontation between his own measured affirmation of saintly value and Nietzsche’s contemptuous dismissal of the saint as a decadent invalid, a figure of insufficient vitality. Second, the Eastern Christian tradition — represented here by John of Damascus, the Philokalia, Andrew Louth’s study of modern Orthodox thought, and Irenée Hausherr — treats the saint not as a psychological type but as an ontological exemplar: one who participates in divine glory, whose image mediates grace, and whose compunction and prayer disclose the structure of the soul’s relationship to God. Third, von Franz reads hagiographic figures such as Saint Peter through the lens of Jungian compensation, noting how popular legend projects shadow qualities onto apostolic saints precisely because official religion has grown too spiritualized. The tension between saint-as-social-phenomenon, saint-as-theophanic-mediator, and saint-as-compensatory-projection gives this entry its conceptual depth.