This presentation is organized in a series reflecting 15 common myths or misunderstandings about the annulment process. The first 10 myths were presented in previous issues of the Intermountain Catholic.
MYTH NUMBER ELEVEN:
A declaration of invalidity (annulment) means that the marriage never took place
The truth is that an annulment can not erase history, and does not try to. An annulment in the Catholic Church deals only with the sacrament of marriage, and not the legal, historical, emotional truth of marriage. An annulment states that for some legal reason recognized by Church Law through the Code of Canon Law the sacrament or the necessary elements for its validity (for those marriages between non-Catholics) was never present in the marriage, and not that the marriage never took place. It is a myth that an annulment means that the marriage never happened.
MYTH NUMBER TWELVE:
Annulments are granted to one party and not to the other
This myth deals with the exercise of basic rights of a party in a marriage trial and the effect of a decision in the life of a couple. If a declaration of invalidity (an annulment) is a determination about the marriage, then obviously it must affect both parties. The notation of an annulment will be made in each of their baptismal registers and in the marriage register. It will not erase anything already there but it will add that an annulment was granted. A declaration of invalidity (annulment) means that neither party is considered any longer to be bound to the marriage they undertook to enter. But this is not the last word.
It is important to remember that a declaration of invalidity of marriage (annulment) does not dispense from the fulfillment of moral and civil obligations contracted by a previous marriage, for example, responsibilities regarding a prior spouse or children. Not only is this a matter of basic fairness, but it is a way in which the Church exercises pastoral care for the security of a future marriage and justice to the former spouse and the children.
MYTH NUMBER THIRTEEN:
Annulments are hard on people
1. Annulments are just for young people
Here, we are making a reference to parties that entered marriage at a young age, and who have experienced shorter unions; later, in the process of maturation, they are confronting the wrenching discovery that they married without a valid foundation due to an unexpected pregnancy, an imminent deployment or a particular emotional situation of both or one of the spouses. Couples who have married at a more mature age and, probably, under apparently normal circumstances, are not representative of this scenario. Even at the risk of understandable criticism, tribunals may not categorically refuse more mature petitioners who have not faced this discovery earlier, denying them due process by reason of age, social status, number of children or time spent cohabiting. When pursuing lawful process, however, such petitioners, no less than the entire Church community, bear a responsibility to avert any scandal such "counter-intuitive" situations might engender. Therefore, no matter what your situation, you never have a "right" to receive an annulment, but the Church protects your right to request the proper investigation.
2. Annulments make it too easy for young people
An annulment cannot be granted on the basis of entering marriage at an early age nor can an annulment grant a dispensation to a person to cease obligations from a previous union. Whoever still thinks, after reading thus far, that there is anything "easy" or casual about the annulment process, should talk to anyone who has experienced one. Though it marks the end of one process, a decree of nullity is not necessarily a green light to marry again. Apart from matters already mentioned, such as the possibility of an appeal, a Vetitum (prohibition), and other permissions or dispensations before re-marriage, dioceses and parishes have specific prerequisites, not only for a party seeking re-marriage, but also the intended spouse. Anyone mistaking an annulment for an escape hatch from responsibilities arising from a previous marriage or the lessons to be learned from it may find this news sobering.
3. 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 of the matter is, the same guiding principle applies 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 that 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.
Stay Connected With Us