← Back to sermon library

You can turn in your confessions 
with me to chapter 25. We're in the chapter concerning 
marriage. Does anyone need a confession? 
All right. We're in the chapter of marriage. Four small paragraphs. Chapter 
25, I'll read all four and then we'll look at a study of the 
doctrine of marriage. Marriage is to be between one man and 
one woman. Neither is it lawful for any 
man to have more than one wife, nor for any woman to have more 
than one husband at the same time. Marriage was ordained for 
the mutual help of husband and wife, for the increase of mankind 
with a legitimate issue, and for the preventing of uncleanness. 
It is lawful for all sorts of people to marry who are able 
with judgment to give their consent. Yet it is the duty of Christians 
to marry in the Lord. And therefore, such as profess 
the true religion should not marry with infidels or idolaters. Neither should such as are godly 
be unequally yoked by marrying with such as are wicked in their 
life or maintain damnable heresy. Marriage ought not to be, within 
the degrees of consanguinity or affinity, forbidden in the 
word, nor can such incestuous marriage ever be made lawful 
by any law of man or consent of parties, so as those persons 
may live together as man and wife. So a very, very short, 
simple paragraph. The importance of upholding the 
heritage of lawful marriage is, I think, perennially demonstrated 
throughout the ages with the ever-abiding influence of sexual 
immorality in our own day with, you know, proliferation and multiplication 
of pronouns and gender confusion and the homosexuality, transsexuality, 
all these sorts of things. But it didn't begin with us throughout 
the ages, really since the fall. A rehearsal of marriage, now 
when I say the fall, marriage wasn't given after the fall. 
Marriage was given prior to the fall, and we'll note that. But 
ever since the introduction, of sin and hence the introduction 
of sexual immorality into the world. Marriage has become obviously 
a very important and front and center issue throughout the history 
of the world. In the context of the Confession, 
The immediate, the very close background was the casting off 
of Roman communion by King Henry VIII in order that he might get 
a divorce. That was sort of the immediate 
history. Under Roman Catholic rule, if 
you will, he couldn't divorce Catherine of Aragon, I think 
it was. And so he divorced the Church of England from the Roman 
communion and really took up the mantle of Protestantism, 
not for any doctrinal reasons, but simply to get out of a marriage. And so there's that in the context, 
but also there's the context of the Roman Catholic Church, 
the Church of England, and really the debate over is marriage under 
the the province of the civil magistrate? Is it a civil matter or is it 
a religious matter? Obviously, we have the light 
of nature and special revelation that speak with regards to the 
divine reality of marriage, its goodness. But is it purely a 
religious matter? Is it purely a civil matter? 
What is the balance, if you will, with regards to the institution 
of marriage? As I said, it's a very simple 
chapter. It's smaller than the Westminster Confession of Faith 
and the Savoy. The Westminster Confession of 
Faith and the Savoy Declaration have a couple paragraphs on adultery 
and divorce. The Baptists didn't retain that, 
not because they disagreed with it or they thought that those 
paragraphs were in any way untoward for this chapter in a confession 
of faith, but There are contextual reasons and doctrinal commitment 
reasons, the one being with respect to divorce, that they thought 
it was a civil matter, not a religious one. Not that the word of God 
didn't speak to it, but there was this affirmation that the ministers 
of the gospel were not to be burdened in secular or civil 
affairs. And so the, you know, the marrying 
of persons and the burying of the dead and other certain things, 
they thought it not the province of the religious or Christians 
to be necessarily engaged in the administration of those things. 
Not that they couldn't be, but the ministers of the gospel were 
to be about the ministry of the word, the ministry of the sacraments, 
and church discipline, and ought not to be caught up necessarily 
with marriage or the burial of the dead. There's also a connection 
here between the doctrine of Christian liberty. Remember, 
probably the last, well, the last four chapters, there's been 
a very close connection between the doctrine of Christian liberty 
and the particular doctrine being treated, and it's no different 
here with the doctrine on marriage. There's a couple, just before 
we jump into the subject matter here a little bit more particularly, 
There's a removal of some phrases from the Westminster Confession 
of Faith and the Savoy Declaration. If we have a look at, for example, 
the purposes of marriage, in paragraph two, the Westminster 
and the Savoy have, marriage was ordained for the mutual help 
of husband and wife, for the increase of mankind with a legitimate 
issue. They have their, end of the church 
with a holy seed. So obviously a sacramental pre-commitment 
to paedo-baptism driving their doctrine of one of the purposes 
of marriage. The Baptists here also remove 
when we read in paragraph three, should not marry with infidels 
or idolaters. The Westminster and the Savoy 
both have, should not marry with infidels, papists, or other idolaters. The Baptists aren't here saying 
that Protestants can marry Roman Catholics. They're simply lumping 
Roman Catholics in with the grander term idolaters, idolaters really 
there speaks largely to Roman Catholics. And then again, lastly, 
the absence of the final two paragraphs, paragraphs five and 
six on divorce and remarriage. So let's have a look at the chapter. 
I'm just going to have a look at four things here. And spanning, 
not necessarily each point being with each paragraph. There's 
a couple of divisions and mergings of content. But the four things 
we're going to have a look at are the monogamous design and 
nature of marriage. the divine origin, timing, and 
purity of marriage, the threefold providential purpose of marriage, 
and then the regulative bounds of marriage. First off, the monogamous design 
and nature of marriage. We see here in paragraph one 
exactly that. Notice, marriage is to be between 
one man and one woman. Neither is it lawful for any 
man to have more than one wife, nor for any woman to have more 
than one husband at the same time. So there's a positive statement 
first being made. Marriage is to be between one 
man and one woman. This obviously draws on the creation 
account. You can turn with me to Matthew 
19. Because in Matthew 19, Jesus 
himself is connecting marriage back to the creation of man and 
woman. And so Jesus here affirms, first 
of all, the binary nature, male and female nature of creation 
without any asterisks or qualifications, and he upholds the monogamous 
nature of marriage between one man and one woman. So notice 
in Matthew 19, beginning at verse 3, the Pharisees also came to 
him testing him and saying, is it lawful for a man to divorce 
his wife for just any reason? And he answered and said to them, 
have you not read that he who made them at the beginning made 
them male and female and said, for this reason, a man shall 
leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife and the 
two shall become one flesh? So then, they are no longer two 
but one flesh. Therefore, what God has joined 
together, let not man separate. Not only is Christ emphasizing 
the the monogamy of marriage, but also the strength of the 
bond. At the time when certificates 
of divorce, and throughout history, when certificates of divorce 
are given for any reason, someone burns the batch of chocolate 
chips, and well, let's get a divorce. Or just for any silly reason 
other than those exclusive reasons which the Bible does bring forth, 
adultery and desertion. But Christ is upholding monogamy, 
but also the strength of the bond. So then they are no longer 
one, two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined 
together, let not man separate. So the point here being, though, 
or going back to the point of the monogamy and the monogamous 
design and nature of marriage, He who made them at the beginning 
made them male and female. And then specifically with regards 
to the pre-fall, the prelapsarian sanctity of marriage, for this 
reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined 
to his wife and the two shall become one flesh. So marriage 
was designed specifically and it's emphasized in this positive 
statement for the union of one man and one woman. So if we just 
pause here for a moment, this is obviously contra-homosexuality. An application is that it is 
sexual perversion. It is sexual. It's adultery. It's madness for a man to be 
engaged in, well, first off, with regards to the nature of 
marriage, for a man to marry a man or a woman to marry a woman. And we, of course, draw the extension 
with regards to sexual perverse relationships of men with men 
and women with women. Leviticus 18, Leviticus 20, Romans 
1, and 1 Corinthians 6, to name only four places, this could 
be named as well because Christ is obviously upholding the creative 
nature of man and woman as man and woman in that binary matter 
but also with respect to the joining together in intimacy, 
in marital intimacy. So this verse speaks, and we 
might ask the question, okay, do Reform Baptists, do we, in 
our modern context, need some sort of supplementation or addition? to the confession of faith because, 
I mean, back then, was there homosexuality? Absolutely. But 
was there all this, you know, the madness of the proliferation 
and multiplication of, you know, gender pronouns and all of this 
craziness? There wasn't, but It's very simple 
here. The statement of the confession 
of faith in chapter 25 is a statement against homosexuality and transsexualism 
because it says marriage is to be between one man and one woman. There's no need, I don't think, 
for an asterisk or anything to draw a direction to a footnote 
that defines what man and woman is. Man is man, woman is woman. And this is a very clear statement 
with regards to marriage, and by extension, the binary nature 
of humanity. There's also a negative statement 
here, and maybe just to pause on that for a moment. This sets 
forth the reality of a divine creator who establishes objective 
and actual identity for men and women. We're in a time where 
there is such self-determination and subjective identity And it's 
a repudiation of God as creator, of God generally, of God as creator 
and of divine authority. This subjective identity, this 
self-determination rails against God as the sovereign and gracious 
determiner of objective reality and of our identity that he has 
bestowed upon us. So this statement, we can apply 
it, of course, with respect to proper monogamy, proper sexuality. And notice that there's also 
a negative prohibition. So we have the positive statement, 
marriage is to be between one man and one woman. And then we 
have a negative prohibition, Neither is it lawful for any 
man to have more than one wife, nor for any woman to have more 
than one husband at the same time. So it's contra polygamy 
as well. So the idea here is the blessed 
simplicity of monogamous marriage. Luther wrote, there is no more 
lovely, friendly, and charming relationship, communion, or company 
than a good marriage. It's qualified by good there 
because there have been and there are and there will be bad marriages. 
But the fact is that God has blessed us with this covenant 
of companionship, this communion of marriage that we have, and 
a good marriage finds itself as that which, where there is 
nothing more lovely, more friendly, more charming, or more communal, 
or finds better company outside of that as a relationship established 
by God. So, it's this wonderful relationship 
that we have, man to woman, woman to man, one man to one woman, 
one woman to one man, and it, It again speaks against polygamy. 
Polygamy is, I think the first instance of polygamy is in Genesis 
4.19. And then God, in his graciousness 
after that, deals in his condescending grace with the matter of polygamy. God doesn't establish it as lawful 
relationships, but rather he condescends in his grace and 
his mercy and his kindness to legislate where man has gone 
awry with his rebellion against God. If we were to simply summarize 
paragraph one, because it is itself a simple paragraph, the 
monogamous design and nature of marriage, and there are a 
number of implications that this speaks to with regards to the 
current madness of sexual idolatry, sexual identity, and just the 
folly that obtains, God has designed it such that it is blessedly 
simple, the reality and the nature of marriage. Secondly, we have 
the divine origin, timing, and purity of marriage. So first 
off, notice its divine origin. Marriage was ordained. So it 
is something that God, in his sovereignty, has ordained for 
man. It's not a social construct. It's not of social devising as 
the as the, you know, the nincompoops of our age like to always say 
when they're contrary to marriage is that it's, oh, it's just a 
social construct that man, you know, the patriarchy forced upon 
humanity for, you know, for man's blessedness and woman's slavery 
or some garbage like that. It's a blessed thing ordained 
by our sovereign God for the enjoyment of humanity, and as 
we'll see in a number of moments, for a threefold and blessed providential 
purpose. So first off, marriage was ordained, 
the divine timing. Marriage was ordained before 
the foundation of the world as all things were ordained before 
the foundation of the world. God ordained it that one man 
and one woman would be joined together in lawful marriage for 
the advancement of humanity, for their mutual fidelity and 
felicity, and for the prevention of sexual infidelity. And so it was not ordained as 
a response to the fall into sin. It was ordained, again, before 
the foundation of the world to be that which would be introduced 
prior to the fall into sin in the garden as that blessed foundational 
establishment for the advance of humanity throughout the world. 
So it is ordained by God, the divine origin. Secondly, we would 
want to note regarding the timing, and we already have, that it 
was ordained, or it was introduced after the creation, at the creation, 
prior to the fall into sin. This is Cox, one of our particular 
Baptist forebears. He wrote marriage. Being first 
instituted in innocency was made honorable and the bond thereof 
sacred and inviolable. So he's speaking that that stage 
of innocency is the stage prior to the fall, that state of innocency, 
and God instituted it there and made it honorable and of the 
nature of a sacred and inviolable bond. So the divine origin, the 
timing of it, it's ordained before the foundation of the world, 
given prior to the fall into sin. And then notice with regards 
to the purity of marriage. Marriage was ordained for the 
mutual help of husband and wife, for the increase of mankind with 
a legitimate issue, and for the preventing of uncleanness. So 
there's a threefold providential purpose with regards to marriage 
that we'll look at next. That's our third point, but we 
want to note here that it's not a degradation to humanity, marriage, 
because it's given prior to the fall into sin. It's not somehow 
a degradation to humanity as if in some sort of weird Roman 
Catholic views where it's given, you know, it's not the ideal 
relationship for the highest, most sanctified relationship 
that one can have is celibacy and then sort of, you know, marriage 
is this second rate, second tier relationship. That's a Roman 
Catholic fiction. marriage is that which was that 
celibacy is lawful as well, but it is not somehow elevated above 
marriage as a super elite relationship where one is solely married to 
God, if you will, and not to a fellow image bearer. So Keech 
wrote on that particular point, he said, marriage is a figure 
of the covenant and union between Christ and his church, which 
ought to be maintained in all purity and honor. So if we move 
a little bit to the typical and anti-typical nature of marriage 
with regards to image bearers in that relationship, serving 
to shadow the substance of the divine and his covenant relationship 
to his people, then we have yet another impetus to maintain the 
purity and the sacredness of marriage, is because it points 
to the divine fidelity. It points, in a Christian context, 
it points to God's fidelity as the husband to the bride and 
his covenantal relationship, and of course to Christ in the 
church in that same covenantal relationship. He died for his 
bride, giving his life for her. We are then to image that in 
our marital relationships, and we are to set out to be marked 
by a fidelity and a purity. Okay, so moving on then to the 
threefold providential purpose of marriage, we have it in this 
same paragraph. Marriage was ordained for the 
mutual help of husband and wife, for the increase of mankind, 
with a legitimate issue, and for preventing of uncleanness. Now, just just some help with 
the language here. The first one is easy, the mutual 
help of husband and wife. The second one, for the increase 
of mankind with a legitimate issue. Now, that's speaking to 
the issue, that which issues forth from the loins of the ancestors, 
the babies that are procured in the relationship of a lawful 
marriage. It's not speaking to mankind 
increasing with some sort of a legitimate argument 
that they bring to HR in their various business contexts, having 
legitimate issues to bring up. It speaks to the progeny that 
man bears, and it speaks to the progeny that man bears in the 
context of lawful marriages. So one man, one woman coming 
together in a lawful marriage bond and then increasing mankind 
based upon the purity and the sanctity of that bond. And I 
think what we are to read in the background here is obviously 
the biblical command to be fruitful and multiply, to take dominion, 
that sort of a thing. And I think maybe even more to 
the point, The family as being foundational to a well-ordered 
society. You know, we can see the just 
the madness that exists in our own day with the destruction 
of the family, with the destruction of, first of all, if you look 
at it, the destruction of God's creation, the destruction of 
man and woman and the simple binary created nature of man 
and woman, and how that tears apart the fabric and the foundation 
of a well-ordered society, you destroy sexual identity, you 
then destroy the family, which then destroys society, and that's 
what we're seeing. The overturning of God, so the 
setting aside of God and the casting up of idols, sexual idols, 
the idol of government, whatever it might be, It's casting aside 
God and replacing God's well-ordered creation with just a horror of 
a substitute. The increase of mankind with 
a legitimate issue has more to it than just kind of a strange 
17th century phrase. It speaks to the very fabric 
of a well-ordered society rooted in one man and one woman coming 
together and bringing forth children. But coming back to the threefold 
providential purpose of marriage, the first is the blessing of 
companionship. Marriage was ordained for the 
mutual help of husband and wife. Maybe just backing up a little 
bit to this, this sort of formula, this confessional formula with 
respect to marriage, well preceded the 17th century. This is Lombard in the 11th century. Marriage is instituted for the 
procreation of children, for mutual fidelity, and as a remedy 
for sin. So there's this threefold formula. Taking the biblical data and 
defining or elaborating upon what marriage is for, the church 
has historically came up with this sort of three-fold summary 
of the biblical information. So, the blessing of companionship. This is more than just a practical 
assistance that's in view here when we look at marriage was 
ordained for the mutual help of husband and wife. I think 
when we read that, it's a very simple statement, and practical 
assistance, the mutual practical assistance is in view, no doubt. You know, at the creation of 
man and woman, God speaks to the fact that it was not good, 
that man was alone, and so he gave Eve to her as that helpmeet, 
as a companion for him, to him, gave her to him, and so, That's 
more, though, than just practical assistance. I think it speaks 
to spiritual nourishment as well. Or maybe the better language 
would be a reciprocating growth in spiritual matters. When we 
look at Ephesians chapter 5, for example, we see wives submitting 
to husbands, husbands loving their wives. And we see this, 
you know, this reality of sanctification brought to the fore with the 
marriage relationship where, in that case, the man is involved 
in the sanctifying of the woman just as Christ feeds and nourishes 
his church. So the husband is to feed and 
nourish in things spiritual within their particular marriage relationship. So yes, it's practical assistance. 
There's also a spiritual element for those who are in the Lord, 
as the confession uses that language. But it also does speak to things of an intimate nature 
as well. The confession is not excluding, 
is not sort of thumbing their nose at legitimate sexual intimacy 
here. The stuff of 1 Corinthians 7, 
marriage was ordained for the mutual help of husband and wife. So it's more than just a simple 
bare practical assistance, it's much deeper than that. So we 
have the blessing of companionship. On that note, Warfield wrote, 
The love between husband and wife is the most precious, tender, 
and ennobling of all affections, and as such is made by the apostle 
the great type of the love of Christ to his church. And so 
it's a wonderful thing. If you think about this as Christians, 
it should ennoble the institution all the more that we are husbands 
to wives, wives to husbands, serving as a type of the love 
of Christ to his church. And so a motivation, another 
motivation in our marital relationships is that we are a reflection of 
or a shadow of that particular substance. We are types of the 
relationship of Christ to his church and we ought to see that 
and so proceed with great joy and great care. Now secondly, 
so we have the blessing of companionship as the first of the threefold 
providential purposes for marriage. Secondly, the inhabitation of 
creation. We already noted that a little 
bit, the increase of mankind with a legitimate issue. And 
it's more than just the population of the earth, based on a creation 
mandate because the deeper and the more ultimate goal is populating 
the earth in order that Christ might bring many sons to glory 
through the preaching of the gospel by virtue of the perfection 
of his saving sacrifice. So we have this, you know, the 
creation command to populate the earth is to populate the 
earth with worshippers of the triune God, and ultimately, to 
the end, that God would receive glory through the salvation of 
a multitude of sinners which no man can number from every 
tribe, tongue, people, and nation. the increase of mankind with 
a legitimate issue, really unto the end that the Lord God Almighty 
would bring many sons to glory through the salvation of many 
sons from their sins. And then thirdly, we have a hedging 
against sexual immorality. Marriage was ordained for the 
preventing of uncleanness. So, you know, with the fall into 
sin, one of the purposes of marriage is to bring man and woman together 
in order that they might have that sanctified context wherein 
sexual intimacy can obtain properly. And, you know, one of the verses 
that it rightly brings forth here is 1 Corinthians 7. We could think of other passages, 
but there we have the threefold providential purpose of marriage 
outlined very clearly. It's simple. The clauses are 
simply stated, but It's very deep. It's much more deep than 
it is if we just look at it on a surface view. So moving on 
then lastly to the regulative bounds of marriage. Paragraphs 
three and four deal with the regulative bounds of marriage. 
And the first thing that we want to note here is the general lawful 
scope. So there's this introductory 
clause that sort of establishes this larger general lawful scope 
for marriage. And that statement is in paragraph 
three, the very first set of clauses there. It is lawful for 
all sorts of people to marry, who are able with judgment to 
give their consent. So it's not just, you know, Christians 
who are allowed to marry. It's not just people from North 
America who are allowed to marry. It's not just white people who 
are allowed to marry. It's lawful for all sorts of 
people to marry. And notice the qualifying statement, 
who are able with judgment to give their consent. So this has 
to do, I think, Two things could be in view here. One would be 
a particular age whereby the mental capacities are such that 
they're able to give their consent unto a lawful marriage bond, 
but also it speaks against forced marriages. Any sort of forced 
marriage is, of course, not lawful. So we have this general lawful 
scope. Marriage is for God's creation. It's a creation ordinance. It 
is not, we would say, and the Confession would be speaking 
against this in part, it's not a sacrament of the Church. The 
Roman Catholic Church has seven sacraments. Proper biblical churches, 
Protestant churches, have two, baptism and the Lord's Supper. 
The Roman Catholic Church has seven, baptism and the Lord's 
Supper, but also marriage is one of them, and there are many 
others. If you want the list, I can try 
to remember after. but marriage is basically in 
their communion, it's a sacrament of the church and therefore it's 
given really more, it's given the wrong sort of emphasis than 
God intended and that the Bible sets forth. and they twist it 
such that the confessionalists here, the Protestant confessionalists, 
have to establish the blessed simplicity of marriage, and that 
it is a creation ordinance. Marriage is for God's creation. It is lawful for all sorts of 
people to marry who are able, with judgment, to give their 
consent. At the time of At the time of the Roman Catholic influence 
in the medieval church, and even beyond the medieval era a little 
bit there, marriages were essentially performed within the context 
of the Roman communion, largely because of this emphasis upon 
the sacramentology of marriage, rather than it simply being an 
ordinance given by God for his creation. We'll set that extended discussion 
aside as we sort of just continue to plow through the material. 
So marriage is for God's creation, and marriage is for all classes 
of men. And it's interesting here that 
though it's not explicit, marriage is for all classes of men, including 
ecclesial officers. So in the Roman Catholic Church, 
of course, Ecclesial officers, priests, bishops, cardinals, 
etc., cannot be married. There is a vow of celibacy that's 
taken on the part of priests, and marriage is forbidden. which is, of course, unlawful 
and blasphemous. And so the simple statement here, 
not only does it encompass a general covering of who marriage is for, 
but it also specifically would include then ecclesial officers. 
So we have this general statement that all sorts of people can 
marry who are able to give their judgment, or able with judgment 
to give consent, but then there's this honing in on Christians 
specifically. And so we see the specific Christian 
permissions, and notice what those are. Yet it is the duty 
of Christians to marry in the Lord. So the first larger statement 
is that Christians are to marry other Christians. Sometimes, 
you know, it's... We're fallible and we live in 
a world where there is much confusion because of sin and remaining 
corruption and all those sorts of things. And so sometimes it 
doesn't always work out that way, even though at the outset 
we believe the other to be a Christian. But nevertheless, the command 
in the Bible is that Christians are to marry in the Lord. And 
notice then it elaborates upon that, it's not just that, but 
there is some meat put upon the bone here with regards to what 
that looks like. And therefore, such as profess 
the true religion should not marry with infidels or idolaters. So it's a strengthening of the 
statement. Christians, general statement, 
Christians marry Christians. further elaboration, Christians 
aren't to marry infidels or idolaters. And probably what's largely in 
view here, especially with the term idolaters, is that Protestants 
aren't to marry Roman Catholics. And not in some sort of, you 
know, weird political approach to the, you know, the Protestant-Catholic 
divide, but a real and true biblical separation or a proper joining. A Christian to marry a Christian, 
not one who, so professes but believes things contrary to proper 
biblical Christianity. And so, I mean, we could think 
of a number of things with regards, if we just think about one practically 
speaking, the doctrine of justification. You have a woman, a Protestant 
woman who firmly believes in the Protestant doctrine of justification 
by faith alone. and seeks to marry a Roman Catholic 
who is adamantly opposed to justification by faith alone, well, that isn't 
unto marital edification. That's not unto a peaceful home. When children come into view 
there, it extends to the confusion of children and all those sorts 
of things. Christians are to marry in the 
Lord and they are not to marry such as who are idolaters, namely 
Roman Catholics. This next statement, neither 
such as are godly, isn't introducing another, like some sort of higher 
class of Christians, like really godly Christians. It's simply 
a synonymous reiteration of the term Christian. So it's really 
just using another term, such as are godly. It's just referring 
to Christians marrying in the Lord. Neither should such as 
are godly be unequally yoked by marrying with such as are 
wicked in their life or maintain damnable heresy. So it's a good 
extensive statement. in order to communicate God's 
design for Christians in marriage, that they marry those who are 
of like spirit. Not just liking the same things, 
but literally of the same spirit. That they were born of God, that 
they hold the true faith, and they're seeking to be faithful 
in that. The maintaining damnable heresy, 
could be a catch-all, but it might have specific connection 
to anti-Trinitarianism and to the anti-Trinitarians in the 
17th century. But suffice it to say, maintain 
damnable heresy is a catch-all. Any who do not uphold the proper 
doctrine of Christ, the proper doctrine of of God, proper biblical 
Christianity, we are not to engage in a marital relationship with 
them. And it's not some sort of, you 
know, hateful limitation here. It's really a very, it's a very 
kind and merciful biblical truism here for marriage between Christians, 
or for marriage with Christians, in order to have a peaceful home, 
in order that husband and wife can mutually edify one another 
in their same faith, and raise up children in the fear and admonition 
of the Lord without always butting heads over justification by faith 
or the nature of the Trinity and those sorts of things. So 
the regulative bounds of marriage, we have the general lawful scope, 
and then we have the specific Christian permissions, and then 
we close here with the limiting lawful scope related to family. That's the stuff of paragraph 
four. Notice what we have here, marriage 
ought not to be within the degrees of consanguinity or affinity 
forbidden in the word. So the first statement and the 
first part of that statement is the restriction regarding 
blood relatives. So that statement, consanguinity, 
just simply means blood relations. So marriage ought not to be within 
the particular degrees of blood relations. And a key passage 
there is Leviticus 18. Leviticus 18 speaks to the exclusions 
and the inclusions pertaining to marriage. And really it boils down to everything 
before first cousin really is forbidden. From first cousin 
and beyond, the Bible sanctions that as lawful marriage. Now, 
we'll leave it at that. In our own day, we probably would 
never find the occasion or the need, nor would it necessarily 
be advisable to marry a first cousin, but it's not against 
the law of God to do so. marriage is not to be within 
the degrees of blood relations as described, as it says here, 
forbidden in the word. And you'll see if you have the 
same confession note here, just this printed version, the reader 
is referred to the 18th chapter of Leviticus. Then it goes on 
to say, or rather, let's deal with that second word there, 
or affinity. So not within the degrees of consanguinity or affinity. Affinity would pertain to a relation 
by marriage. So consanguinity is a relation 
by blood, a blood relation. Affinity is a legal relation 
by marriage. So the restriction regarding 
relatives by marriage. And one of the things that we 
have with regards to, if we think about the wisdom of this for 
a moment, family sanctity and social order, I think are deeply 
rooted in these particular prohibitions. For example, Chrysostom and Owen 
write the following things. The love of husband and wife 
is the force that welds society together. John Owen, marriage 
is the foundation of all society and the chief channel of all 
the comforts of life. It is that state where God hath 
placed us under the bond of mutual affection and in which the sweetness 
of human society is to be tasted. So the wisdom of excluding and 
restricting, among other connections regarding wisdom, the divine 
wisdom in restricting marriages so that degrees of consanguinity 
and affinity are not allowed, finds in view human relationships 
and the disturbances that can obtain if a son marries a father's 
wife or if a if a son marries a daughter and 
these sorts of things. Not only do we have other points 
relative to creation, the image of God and certain things and 
proper wisdom, but with regards to the family being foundational 
to society, with regards to a lawful bond between a man and a woman 
being the foundation for an ordered society, if we throw in disturbances 
where people with blood relation or people within a particular 
lawful married relationship are getting married, it just brings 
chaos, to simply put it. And so there is great wisdom 
in God introducing these restrictions to what should obtain between 
a man and a woman in the marriage bond, And it speaks to really 
what the providential, one of the providential purposes of 
marriage is, the inhabitation of creation and ultimately bringing 
many sons to glory to the praise of God through the finished work 
of Christ. So these regulative bounds of 
marriage are not, you know, the regulative bounds of a tyrant 
seeking to restrict joy, but the wisdom of God Sovereign in 
His nature, glorious in His being, perfect in His goodness and His 
love to His creation, with the ultimate purpose of bringing 
man and woman together to enjoy a mutual fidelity and mutual 
felicity, and ultimately for the bringing forth of many sons 
and daughters who will, by amazing grace, in due time, name the 
Savior as their own. So that's a very brief treatment 
and a non-extensive treatment of the topic of marriage. We'll close in prayer, and then 
if there are any questions, we have a little bit of time here, 
about eight and a half minutes. Let's pray. Heavenly Father, 
we thank you for your word concerning marriage. We thank you. how you 
bless us, men and women, with this blessed bond of marriage, 
this covenant, this compact. We rejoice in how you bless your 
creatures. We pray that you'd help any and 
all here who are married or who are planning to be married, that 
you would help us, that you would help them. that you would help 
us to see the joy in marriage, the blessedness of marriage, 
the sacredness, the sanctity of it, and Lord God, that you 
would do such a work in this world today that you would cause 
men and women, boys and girls, to cast off the madness of sexual 
perversion, the proliferation of pronouns, the madness of homosexuality 
and transsexualism, that you would cause them to see the wisdom 
of your creation, and cause them to enter into proper relationships 
with each other, that they might see the joy and know the joy 
of the marriage bond. And we do pray that you'd go 
with us now as the relationship of marriage points us to your 
covenant faithfulness, the relationship of Christ to his church, help 
us to go into worship with our minds, our hearts resting upon 
those things, that we might see your covenant fidelity and perfection, 
and that we might sing the praises of our gracious God, and we pray 
in Christ's name, amen. Any, yes, Leslie. And then when we think of the 
regular principle of worship, the argument we make is that 
wedding ceremonies ought not to be in the context of the corporate 
church. Yeah, well, I think it's good that you bring that up and 
that your mind's thinking regulative principle, because one of the 
Protestant oppositions to the Roman Catholic Church at the 
point of marriage as a sacrament is exactly that. But I think 
if a church officer performs a marriage in a church 
building, that's not a violation of the regulative principle, 
because regulative principle specifically applies to Lord's 
Day worship. So it's not the regulative principle 
of life, it's the regulative principle of worship. a pastor to engage in a marriage 
ceremony is not a violation of the regulative principle. Now, 
if they were to do it within the context of Lord's Day worship 
and they preach a sermon and then they say, okay brethren, 
we're now gonna observe a marriage between John and Jane, then yes, 
that would be a violation of the regulative principle of worship. 
But to have a marriage on a Saturday in a church building is not a 
violation of the regular principle. Yeah, well, I think, yeah, I 
wouldn't say no, that there's an element of worship. I think 
singing hymns in the context of a wedding ceremony, but the 
idea is that, you know, that's a simple, you know, more general 
worshipful as opposed to Lord's Day worship. 
What is to obtain on the Lord's Day Sabbath in the worship of 
the triune God, that's different. Yep. Yep. So, similarly married couples 
that seem to become church-going, practicing 
Christians, is it more desirable to also have a church wedding. Or, that may even be, since they're 
already married by law. Similar. So, we got a JP, that's 
on the right. Right. And then now, they're 
going to church, let's say. Yeah. And, should that be some 
type of church? No, not necessarily, no. No. There's nothing that the church 
necessarily brings as far as an actual officiated ceremony 
that would sanctify that bond more than that which obtained 
between the bringing together in a civil marriage. What does 
take place, though, is the means of grace in the church that that 
married couple now attends to. So just the gathering of the 
church, baptism, the Lord's Supper, those sorts of things, that which 
God has ordained as actual means of grace. That's why one of the 
reasons why Protestants reject a Roman Catholic sacrament which is a means of grace, the 
wedding and marriage is a means of grace. And so to say that 
a Christian ceremony, a Christian wedding ceremony would somehow 
sanctify that which God really, as sovereign creator, has already 
established in a civil wedding, yeah, that's sort of to lean 
more towards the Roman Catholic view Yeah. Yes. Just thinking about the history 
of marriage. So Roman Catholics, if you want 
to remarry, you'd have to get an annulment in the church. And 
I didn't know for a long time that also is true of Anglicans. Church of England, that they're, 
and so when you're mentioning about King Henry, he basically, 
brought in Protestantism to get it towards, it's just kind of 
interesting. Yeah, there's a whole interesting history there if 
you read some of the historical treatments of that. I know James 
Renahan knows a lot about it and has spoken and written a 
bit about it, but if you read just even just general histories 
about it, it's quite an interesting tale, yeah. Yes? So marriage is a picture 
of the relationship But is that like since the fall or also before 
the fall where man was perfect? How many got into marriage in 
paradise? So was it already a picture of 
the love of Christ for his church when there wasn't a need for 
a savior yet? Well, that's interesting. I mean, because in the context 
of Ephesians 5, the specific connection is Christ dying for 
his church and sanctifying his church, and that sort of speaking 
to a husband, sanctifying his wife by the truth within the 
context of the marriage bond. But we would say that the marriage as a picture of Christ in this 
church prior to the fall. And that it served as, it served 
the relationship between Adam and Eve before the fall would 
have served in that same typical, anti-typical relationship then. Yeah, I think we would still 
say that. But without the element, without the redemptive element, 
because there was yet no sin. All right, anything else? No.