# 1689 is short when it comes to marriage?



## Matthew1344 (Sep 14, 2014)

> 5.Adultery or fornication, committed after a contract, being detected before marriage, giveth just occasion to the innocent party to dissolve that contract. In the case of adultery after marriage, it is lawful for the innocent party to sue out a divorce, and after the divorce to marry another, as if the offending party were dead.





> 6. Although the corruption of man be such as is apt to study arguments, unduly to put asunder those whom God hath joined together in marriage; yet nothing but adultery, or such willful desertion as can no way be remedied by the Church or civil magistrate, is cause sufficient of dissolving the bond of marriage; wherein a public and orderly course of proceeding is to be observed; and the persons concerned in it, not left to their own wills and discretion in their own case.



Why doesn't LBCF have this? Did they not agree?


----------



## C. M. Sheffield (Sep 14, 2014)

It is more a matter of leaving certain matters unaddressed in an area where views may differ among good men and good churches so as to create no unnecessary impediment to fellowship.


----------



## puritanpilgrim (Sep 14, 2014)

I believe some of them held to a permanence view of marriage:

The Permanence View of Marriage | SermonAudio.com


----------



## Pilgrim (Sep 14, 2014)

C. M. Sheffield said:


> It is more a matter of leaving certain matters unaddressed in an area where views may differ among good men and good churches so as to create no unnecessary impediment to fellowship.



This is my thought as well. I think they either differed and/or thought it was a local church matter. This issue is not addressed in the Appendix. The Lord's Supper is addressed though, with a statement that close communion is not in the confession because a few favored open communion. (Another example is with the Savoy having much more to say about church government whereas the 2nd LBCF basically omits most if not all of that.) 

In this extract from the appendix, communion is mentioned as being but one example:



> We are not insenible that as to the order of Gods house, and entire communion therein there are some things wherein we (as well as others) are not at a full accord among our selves, as for instance; the known principle, and state of the consciences of diverse of us, that have agreed in this Confession is such; that we cannot hold Church-communion, with any other then Baptized-believers, and Churches constituted of such; yet some others of us have a greater liberty and freedom in our spirits that way; and therefore we have purposely omitted the mention of things of that nature, that we might concurre, in giving this evidence of our agreement, both among our selves, and with other good Christians, in those important articles of the Christian Religion, mainly insisted on by us: and this notwithstanding we all esteem it our chief concern, both among our selves, and all others that in every place call upon the name of the Lord Jesus Christ our Lord, both theirs and ours, and love him in sincerity, to endeavour to keep the unity of the Spirit, in the bond of peace; and in order thereunto, to exercise all lowliness and meekness, with long-suffering, forbearing one another in love.


----------

