|
 |
Myth No. 10:
"Annulments make it too hard for young people"
Someone
may say annulments make it too hard for young people to "get on
with their lives." Others see a double standard in not applying the same strict scrutiny of the annulment
process to a prospective marriage, especially a second one. The truth is, the same guiding principle
obtains before and after marriage: to uphold the natural freedom to marry. This freedom, however, is not
absolute and the burden of proof logically differs in each situation. Freedom to marry is presumed, unless
there is an impediment, such as an existing marriage would obviously be; in that case, it is the existing
marriage which is presumed valid and the parties who must prove it is not.
A married person, in good conscience, maintaining he or she should be held free of that
prior marital bond, must understand that it is he or she who acquired the so-called impediment of ligamen
(prior bond) in a public ceremony (typically), by exchanging vows "most sacred and most serious." He or
she, therefore, bears the burden of proving freedom from it. It is eminently reasonable that canonical
procedures, with equally sacred and serious judicial ceremony, should require examination not only of
the consciences of the parties, but also of the other participants, including witnesses required to testify
under oath, and judges bound to decide with moral certitude.
A person who never presumed to take such
vows, in equally good conscience, is not obliged to prove he or she is free to
marry. The process of "pre-marital investigation" does seek to protect engaged
couples from whatever might compromise their choice or freedom, but not by
putting their relationship on trial. Before or after marriage, where canonical
processes are properly followed, the freedom and rights of all parties are given
the respect they are due.
|
|
