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

[Elizabeth3]

Desiring martyrdom as a “free ticket to Heaven” doesn’t exactly ring of sanctity.

If you desire to be a martyr and die for your faith or for the sake of some virtue or commandment, then it is sanctity. We have to remember, the martyr’s aren’t doing all this on their own power, it is in cooperation with a grace from God because of their love for Him.

As far as desiring it because it’s a “free ticket to heaven,” it’s still a human desire and it’s honest. At least it’s a desire to get there and it’s better than giving up and giving in to sin.

 

[TheAmazingGrace]

If you desire to be a martyr and die for your faith or for the sake of some virtue or commandment, then it is sanctity.

Yeah, but I wasn’t talking about that. I was talking about “free tickets to Heaven.” I don’t think that’s the attitude toward martyrdom God wants us to cultivate. That mindset’s lack of humility before death is also disconcerting: you can’t talk about martyrdom as an easy way out, because you honestly have no idea whether you’d balk or not.

 

[Xantippe]

If you desire to be a martyr and die for your faith or for the sake of some virtue or commandment, then it is sanctity.

But less so if it’s explicitly desired because you are failing at avoiding sin in daily life.

That mindset’s lack of humility before death is also disconcerting: you can’t talk about martyrdom as an easy way out, because you honestly have no idea whether you’d balk or not.

Right.

 

[TheAmazingGrace]

Her heroic virtue comes not from choosing her own death over being assaulted, but her forgiveness of Alessandro.

Yes! Say it for the folks in the back of the room!

 

[Elizabeth3]

Yeah, but I wasn’t talking about that. I was talking about “free tickets to Heaven.”

That’s why after I talked about that there can be a desire for martyrdom that comes from a love of God, I said,

As far as desiring it because it’s a “free ticket to heaven,” it’s still a human desire and it’s honest. At least it’s a desire to get there and it’s better than giving up and giving in to sin.

That mindset’s lack of humility before death is also disconcerting: you can’t talk about martyrdom as an easy way out, because you honestly have no idea whether you’d balk or not.

Of course none of us know how we would react but we could hope that if we were put in that situation we would have the grace that we would love God to the degree that we would need to follow through.

I don’t think Melodeonist meant it in a way that he was saying he’s so holy that he would for sure go through with it. I think it was just a simple observation that if you could follow through, you would be done with the constant struggle of sin. You might be reading more into what he meant.

 

[Elizabeth3]

But less so if it’s explicitly desired because you are failing at avoiding sin in daily life.

I think the thing with those who obtain the grace of martyrdom is that they were able to reach that degree of holiness due to the ease with which they lived ordinary virtue in the time leading up to the event.

 

[Elizabeth3]

Her heroic virtue comes not from choosing her own death over being assaulted, but her forgiveness of Alessandro

If I understand the documents written for her canonization, it was for heroic virtue in not only her refusal of his advances over many months but also for the forgiveness she granted before death. It’s not an either/or thing. It was for the whole range of virtue she showed over time.

"In the 1947 Decree of Beatification of the Congregation of Rites (a section of which was transformed in 1969 into the Congregation for the Causes of Saints), we read the following concerning the heroic virtue of the young girl who died after being stabbed 14 times by the would-be rapist, 18 year old Alessandro Serenelli :

"Never has there been a time when the palm of martyrdom was missing from the shining robes of the Spouse of Christ [the Church]. Even today in our very degraded and unclean world there are brief examples of unearthly beauty. The greatest of all triumphs is surely the one which is gained by the sacrifice of one’s life, a victory made holy by the blood-red garments of martyrdom. When, however, the martyr is a child of tender age with the natural timidity of the weaker sex such a martyrdom rises to the sublime heights of glory.

This is what happened in the case of Maria Goretti, a poor little girl and yet very wonderful. She was a Roman country maid who did not hesitate to struggle and to suffer, to shed her life’s blood and to die with heroic courage in order to keep herself pure and to preserve the lily-white flowers of her virginity."

I know that last line makes it sound like they are saying that women should die rather than be raped but I don’t think it’s meant to be interpreted that way. She went above and beyond what would be required for the sake of the virtue of chastity. She chose it. It wasn’t required of her.

 

[Elizabeth3]

I meant that a rape victim is never consenting. If a person is threatened with violence or death to themselves or someone they love unless they have sex, it is still rape. Exactly the same as if they were physically overpowered. They have not consented.

Let’s go back to the Catholic Dictionary’s definition of rape and pull out this line

“Rape can be committed by the use of physical or moral force”

In the cases we are talking about, it seems that it was the latter. Then we ask, “What is moral force?”

Moral force is “an efficient incentive.”

In this case, submit to sex or I will kill you. The person does have to give consent in this scenario. However, giving consent, does not imply that they are culpable of the sin against chastity. What is culpable?

Culpable is "Morally responsible for an evil action. Culpability assumes sufficient awareness and (internal) consent to the evil done. "

A person consenting under moral force is not giving internal consent meaning they do not will to have sex with this person. Their internal consent may be to save their own life but they are not having sex by free consent of their will.

When a man rapes a woman it is a sin against chastity. His sin against chastity. Ultimately, it is a sin against an all good and an all loving God. Heroically, these girls chose death rather than to have any part of anything that would that would offend the love of God.

 

[Elizabeth3]

A rape victim does not give consent. She has not sinned.

In the “moral force” scenario there is an element of consent.

Consent under moral force does not = consent to sin by having sex.

Consent under moral force would = a decision for self-preservation.

You seem to be defining consent as “agreeing to have sex.” That’s not what is meant in this situation. If someone says, Give me your money or I’ll kill you. You would hand over your money. You’ve consented to give him the money but it isn’t your will to sin against the commandment in doing so. The internal intent of your will is self-preservation which is every person’s right. That’s why someone isn’t guilty of murder if they kill someone who was trying to kill them first.

 

[Cruciferi]

Anna Kolesárová - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[Elizabeth3]

That’s pretty condescending of you. My mother was raped as a teen. I know what rape is. I’ve spent a lot of time today trying to answer your questions about how the church defines these things. These moral definitions of the church don’t always match up the same with how our culture is currently using these terms.

Consent in our current culture with regard to sexual activity is defined as “saying yes to willingly have sex.”

Consent from a moral standpoint can either be freely given or not freely given. If it’s freely given, then there is a moral responsibility. If it is under coercion, threat, fraud etc, then it is not freely given and the person is not morally responsible.

Look at how they decide marriage annulments. It is understood that consent must be freely given in order for the marriage to be valid. If a woman consents to marriage and makes vows, she has given consent. If it’s later discovered that her husband was having an affair with the maid-of-honor before the marriage and it continued after the marriage, it is decided that the consent the bride gave was not free because had she known this information at the time she made vows, she would not have given her consent.

I’ve really said all I can say. You seem to want to blame me when I’m only conveying how the Church determines these things. Perhaps it would be better if you direct your questions to a priest or spiritual director.

 

[JimG]

It seems inevitable that this young Slovak girl as well as St. Maria Goretti will be misunderstood. We live in an era when chastity is little valued. Someone who dies in defense of it will certainly cause puzzlement. It shocks our sensibilities. But we can easily appreciate St. Augustine, who prayed, “Lord, make me chaste, but not yet.”

 

[Xantippe]

It seems inevitable that this young Slovak girl as well as St. Maria Goretti will be misunderstood. We live in an era when chastity is little valued. Someone who dies in defense of it will certainly cause puzzlement. It shocks our sensibilities. But we can easily appreciate St. Augustine, who prayed, “Lord, make me chaste, but not yet.”

It’s funny you mention Augustine.

<b><big>St. Augustine on misplaced shame</big></b>

dawneden.blogspot.com

Signs of Virginity

Although the theme of bloodied nuptial sheets seems pervasive in western culture, its association with female virginity is uniquely tied to a brief passage in the book of Deuteronomy detailing the procedure for verifying a young woman's purity; it seldom, if ever, appears outside of Abrahamic...

books.google.com

As you can see from the second link, Augustine is well-known for asserting that women should not commit suicide in order to prevent rape.

That is, by the way, a big problem with over-weighing physical virginity. If physical virginity is the end-all-be-all, why shouldn’t women kill themselves to avoid rape?

 

[Xantippe]

Augustine’s argument against suicide was a major break with Roman thought on the issue–Romans were very prone to choosing suicide over living with dishonor.

Here’s Augustine in the City of God talking about, “Lucretia, who put an end to her life because of the outrage done her.”

http://wise.fau.edu/~tunick/courses/hpt1/Augustine_Lucretia.html

I haven’t read the whole background, but it sounds like the pagans of Augustine’s time were critical of Christian women for not killing themselves to avoid being raped/after being raped.

 

[Elizabeth3]

I can only repeat myself. If it is not given freely it is not consent.

I can see by this statement that you don’t have full understanding of how the Church defines consent or WHAT would be consented to or not consented to in the cases we’ve been discussing.

 

[Elizabeth3]

It seems inevitable that this young Slovak girl as well as St. Maria Goretti will be misunderstood. We live in an era when chastity is little valued. Someone who dies in defense of it will certainly cause puzzlement. It shocks our sensibilities. But we can easily appreciate St. Augustine, who prayed, “Lord, make me chaste, but not yet.”

Right. They chose what they did out of a heroic love for God and that seems so incomprehensible to our minds because it’s not required of us by ordinary virtue. The Church honoring them for their choice is misinterpreted as implying rape victims had a choice in being a victim and that is not what is being conveyed.

 

[Elizabeth3]

As you can see from the second link, Augustine is well-known for asserting that women should not commit suicide in order to prevent rape.

He’s right. The early Church had a lot of consecrated virgins who thought that due to their vows they must commit suicide rather than be raped. He explained that virginity was morally a virtue of the soul rather than the material virginity of the body.

He wrote, “…purity is a virtue of the soul…what sane man can suppose that, if his body be seized and forcibly made use of to satisfy the lust of another, he thereby loses his purity? For if purity can be thus destroyed, then assuredly purity is no virtue of the soul; nor can it be numbered among those good things by which the life is made good.” He goes on “I suppose no one is so foolish as to believe that, by this destruction of the integrity of one organ, the virgin has lost anything even of her bodily sanctity. And thus, so long as the soul keeps this firmness of purpose which sanctifies even the body, the violence done by another’s lust makes no impression on this bodily sanctity, which is preserved intact by one’s own persistent continence.”

The Catholic Encyclopedia agrees when it states “Morally, virginity signifies the reverence for bodily integrity which is suggested by a virtuous motive. Thus understood, it is common to both sexes, and may exist in a women even after bodily violation committed upon her against her will. Physically, it implies a bodily integrity, visible evidence of which exists only in women.”

Note how that last sentence is worded in the bold. This means that while bodily integrity implies a sign of the virtue in the soul, it’s absence doesn’t necessarily follow that the virtue of purity is not maintained.

 

[TheAmazingGrace]

Right. They chose what they did out of a heroic love for God and that seems so incomprehensible to our minds because it’s not required of us by ordinary virtue.

It’s not required of us for the same reason resisting an armed robber isn’t required of us: it’s not a smart idea.

 

[Elizabeth3]

It’s not required of us for the same reason resisting an armed robber isn’t required of us: it’s not a smart idea.

Well, then I guess she was just a fool and the Church is foolish Herself for canonizing someone based on sheer folly.

 

[TheAmazingGrace]

Well, then I guess she was just a fool and the Church is foolish Herself for canonizing someone based on sheer folly.

Like I said, there was probably more to the story than “she didn’t let herself get raped.”