By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Pope Leo XIV presided over the canonization Mass of Carlo Acutis and Pier Giorgio Frassati in St. Peter’s Square on September 7, 2025, declaring Acutis the Catholic Church’s first millennial saint. Acutis, who died at age 15, was known for his computer skills and used technology to spread the faith, earning him the nickname “God’s Influencer”. The Mass, attended by approximately 80,000 people, also saw the canonization of Frassati, who was known for his devotion to serving the poor. The Pope emphasized that both saints demonstrated how to make one’s life a masterpiece by dedicating it to God.
Read the original article here
Well, here we are, with Pope Leo XIV declaring teen computer whiz Carlo Acutis the first millennial saint. It’s certainly a headline-grabbing declaration, and naturally, it’s got people talking. The immediate thought that pops into mind is: why now, and why this particular young man? The fact that he was proficient with computers, specifically creating a website, seems to be a central point of his story, and I can’t help but wonder about its relevance to the lofty status of sainthood.
The core of this narrative seems to be about Carlo’s digital literacy. The comments highlight his skill in building a website. It’s presented as though this was an exceptional feat. This isn’t entirely wrong, especially considering the era in which he lived, the early 2000s, when the internet was still taking shape, and the ability to create a website was a more specialized skill. He seems to have used the internet to document Eucharistic miracles. But let’s be real, many people built websites back then. It’s a common point of comparison and, honestly, it’s understandable. Someone did make a point about the fact that the ability to build a website, or even a religious website, isn’t something particularly rare. It feels as though the criteria for becoming a saint have been altered.
Then there’s the visual. The descriptions paint a picture of a young man, laid out in jeans and a sweatshirt, seemingly asleep in a glass-sided tomb. This adds another layer of complexity to the conversation. The comments bring up the preservation of his body, and this, in itself, becomes a point of discussion.
The discussion also touches on the matter of miracles. Traditionally, a saint is someone who is believed to have performed miracles. The article’s account of Carlo’s canonization suggests there were reported miracles. These are integral to the process of sainthood, but the comments touch upon how verifiable these miracles are.
One of the key points raised is whether the emphasis on his tech skills overshadows other, more traditional attributes of sainthood. It raises the question of whether this is a bid to engage younger generations or simply a response to the times. The comments point out that perhaps the church is simply trying to stay relevant by connecting with a younger audience in a new way.
Another element worth considering is the potential perception of influence or bias in the process. The comments suggest this is related to his family’s background, which is perceived as wealthy. The suggestion that a family’s financial standing could influence the process certainly adds another layer of complexity.
It’s natural to feel a bit skeptical. The details of Carlo’s life suggest a deep religious devotion and charitable work. His commitment to his faith is undoubtedly commendable. The criticisms, however, seem to hinge on the idea that his computer skills alone are not enough. The comments suggest that it feels like a lowering of the bar for sainthood.
At the end of the day, this declaration is likely to be met with a mixed reaction. It’s a reminder that faith, technology, and the ever-evolving world are coming together. It’s a story that sparks debate, contemplation, and, above all, conversation.