News Report: "Young Slovak martyr will be beatified." 16-Year-Old Girl Was Shot By Soldier She Would Not Let Rape Her

[mdgspencer]

Young Slovak martyr will be beatified - spectator.sme.sk

At the end of WWIl soldiers came. “Anna prepared food for one of them but refused sexual intercourse, even when her life was threatened.”

“She ran to her father and brother, under gunpoint, and was soon killed by the soldier with two shots. Due to ongoing fights, her family spent one more night with her dead body in the cellar and then hastily buried her in a shallow grave.”

The communist government would not let her story be known, but then communism fell in 1989. Her grave has become a place of pilgrimage for young Slovaks since the late 1990s, and has attracted growing numbers of people. Now, the Catholic Church has just said she will beatified sometime in 2018.

Slovakia, a nation in central Europe, came into existence as a separate country when Czechoslovakia divided into the Slovak Republic and the Czech Republics in 1992.

 

[Dan_Defender]

Just like St Maria Goretti who refused to be raped and was killed instead.

 

[FrancisPio]

Terrible story. I hope that soldier spent the rest of his life in prison. Maybe someone can educate me here. I don’t quite understand the rules for beatification. She died defending herself from this man, not the Christian faith correct? If she was an athiest who defended herself would she be beatified?

 

[mythbuster1]

She was beatified for her heroic commitment to the virtue of chastity, what would be called in military terms, “above and beyond the call of duty.”

 

[mdgspencer]

A previous poster asked a good question: “She died defending herself from this man, not the Christian faith correct? If she was an atheist who defended herself would she be beatified?”

The article about her in Wikipedia throws light on this: “Her final words were recorded as: “Goodbye father! Jesus, Mary, Joseph!” The girl had made her confession and had received Communion not long before she was killed.”

 

[Elizabeth3]

She died defending herself from this man, not the Christian faith correct? If she was an athiest who defended herself would she be beatified?

It was for what she was defending against, which was to not allow a sin against the virtue of chastity, even under threat of death. An atheist probably wouldn’t be worried about sin and might put up a defense against being violated or killed for reasons of self-preservation.

A couple sources I came across said “Anna Kolesárová is considered a martyr in the defense of chastity, known in Latin as In defensum castitatis.”

 

[OsculeturMeOsculo]

That’s an amazing testimony. It is nice that she will soon be one step away from being canonized.

 

[TheOldColonel]

I have the same problem. This story seems to tacitly assign some negligence to those who survive such an ordeal and comes dangerously close to blaming the victims. Victims of such a crime have violated chastity in no way.

 

[paperwight]

I have the same problem. This story seems to tacitly assign some negligence to those who survive such an ordeal and comes dangerously close to blaming the victims. Victims of such a crime have violated chastity in no way.

I totally agree with your well-expressed post, TheOldColonel, and yours too, Cecilia Dympna.

I can only hope that there is more to the story. Perhaps the girl. was exemplary in what she did for the poor, and so on. Otherwise it seems a very poor basis on which to beatify someone.

 

[TheAmazingGrace]

Getting raped ain’t a sin. Just so we’re all clear.

 

[ConfusedLucy]

I wonder if a more recent case of this sort would be considered for beatification. It does make me a little uncomfortable.

 

[Benadam]

An atheist girl , outwardly speaking, inherently would not be intending to avoid disappointing God. What her inward intention truly is would remain between her and God. Not so with this Martyr. Her Holy intention was outwardly expressed.

 

[Elizabeth3]

You seem to be suggesting that to be raped is a sin against chastity.

Atheists would fight just as hard against a rapist.

First, all I did was point out what the Church has declared so it’s not my suggestion.

I said "It was for what she was defending against, which was to not allow a sin against the virtue of chastity, even under threat of death. I didn’t say it would be HER sin.

Second, you’re misunderstanding, to the best of my knowledge what the Church is saying. She is not saying that the girl would have sinned if the rape happened, She is saying that the girl died defending chastity. She wouldn’t consent to the murderer’s demands because she knew, as best as she could understand at her age, that what he was demanding would be an offense against God. Not her own offense, but his.

Third, from reading both this account and the account of Maria Goretti, their murderers were demanding they consent to sex under threat of death or violence rather than overpowering them against their will, which they could have easily done when the girls refused. Instead, they murdered them for their refusal to consent. I think in Maria’s case, over a period of many months she refused advances under threats of violence and on the day she was killed, he again demanded she consent, she refused, he attacked her trying to overpower her but in the process of her fighting him off, he flew into a rage and stabbed her to death. If he had been successful, she would not have committed any sin.

Here are brief accounts of both…

“When a Russian soldier searched their home, Anna prepared food for him but refused sexual intercourse, even when her life was threatened.”

“He propositioned her [Maria] on several occasions and harassed her with impure suggestions. On July 5, 1902, he would be denied no longer. As she once again rebuffed his sexual advance, shouting, “No! It is a sin! God does not want it!”, Alexander lunged to the deed, stabbing Maria 14 times.”

 

[Elizabeth3]

This story seems to tacitly assign some negligence to those who survive such an ordeal and comes dangerously close to blaming the victims. Victims of such a crime have violated chastity in no way.

You’re absolutely right Colonel. See my explanation in comment 16.

 

[Elizabeth3]

I wonder if a more recent case of this sort would be considered for beatification. It does make me a little uncomfortable.

This case and Maria Goretti’s story does seem to get people up in arms when they misunderstand what the Church is saying. When the word rape is used, most people picture the girl’s fighting someone to the death who is in the process of overpowering them, but in these cases it was more of a refusal to submit to demands under threat of death or violence.

There is also confusion in that the girl’s would have kept ordinary virtue, even if they consented under threat, because they could not freely consent. They would have been attempting self-preservation or a sort of defense against being killed.

Some people think the Church is saying the girls would have been at fault or sinned if they gave in, which is not true. The Church is honoring them for exhibiting heroic virtue rather than ordinary virtue.

Heroic Virtue
"The performance of extraordinary virtuous actions with readiness and over a period of time. The moral virtues are exercised with ease, while faith, hope, and charity are practiced to an eminent degree. The presence of such virtues is required by the Church as the first step toward canonization. The person who has practiced heroic virtue is declared to be Venerable, and is called a “Servant of God.” "

 

[Xantippe]

I have the same problem. This story seems to tacitly assign some negligence to those who survive such an ordeal and comes dangerously close to blaming the victims. Victims of such a crime have violated chastity in no way.

Yeah.

I especially dislike the phrasing, “16-Year-Old Girl Was Shot By Soldier She Would Not Let Rape Her,” and especially when there’s similar language regarding Maria Goretti. It’s as though people are completely unaware of the size and strength differential between a full-grown man and an average teenage or tween girl. There’s no “would not let” in that situation.

 

[Xantippe]

If he had been successful, she would not have committed any sin.

But sadly, probably wouldn’t have been beatified even if she’d been murdered afterward, even though she would have been just as virtuous, and it would just be a just the reality that an 11-year-old can’t expect to fight off a full grown man.

When the word rape is used, most people picture the girl’s fighting someone to the death who is in the process of overpowering them, but in these cases it was more of a refusal to submit to demands under threat of death or violence.

That’s fair. I think a lot of people who write about this are not very clear, though–they make it sound like rape can be avoided through sheer force of will, which both unfair to other women and misleading to girls listening.

These girls were not raped because of particular circumstances, but under slightly different circumstances, they would have been raped, even if they’d done exactly the same thing.

 

[TheAmazingGrace]

An atheist girl , outwardly speaking, inherently would not be intending to avoid disappointing God.

I’m sure there’s more to her story than the way she died. If that was her intention it was a misguided one, because being the victim of rape is not a violation of chastity. We shouldn’t encourage Catholics girls to think that their physical virginity is more important than their life.

 

[Elizabeth3]

But sadly, probably wouldn’t have been beatified even if she’d been murdered afterward, even though she would have been just as virtuous, and it would just be a just the reality that an 11-year-old can’t expect to fight off a full grown man.

You’re right in that that could be a possibility because no one would have ever known the months and months of refusal to consent, or the deathbed forgiveness she gave to her murderer, if she had been raped and killed on the spot. I don’t think it would be impossible that she would be beatified if her whole story, even if her attacker had been successful, would have come to light. Most people focus on the final attack in her case but she was harassed by this guy for months and at her age it was quite impressive her refusal to consent “because it would be a sin” was her guiding factor.

Edited to add for clarity - not her sin, his sin.

 

[TheAmazingGrace]

I said "It was for what she was defending against, which was to not allow a sin against the virtue of chastity, even under threat of death. I didn’t say it would be HER sin.

That seems rather strange to me. Replace rape with something like theft: is a robbery victim exercising heroic virtue when he fights back against an armed mugger, since he’s “not allowing a sin against the 7th Commandment, even under threat of death”? No. He’s gambling with his life over something of infinitely lesser value. Most people would call that a lack of common sense.