I did not ask you is Peter is the rock, I asked where the authority to dissolve a marriage calling it "irregular" exists in scripture.
Where is the scriptural precedent to say that vows taken are not "regular"
Mark :10:9 Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate."
Mat 19:9 And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except [it be] for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.
Hbr 13:4 Marriage [is] honourable in all, and the bed undefiled: but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge.
Nowhere does the bible say unless there are any vows that are "irregular" and can be declared so by the church..
It was not until the middle ages that the church claimed authority over marriage when it was an "economic unit" or one that secured treaties and kingdoms.
So then they assumed the ability to regulate it
So there is no biblical precedent for the church to make the determination that any marriage is invalid
And the simple answer is in the power of binding and loosing conferred upon the Apostles in St. Matthew 16.19, and 18.18. The judgements of the leaders of the Church are the judgements of heaven and are confirmed by heaven by the very fact of their being exercised.
Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate.
The leaders of the Church are the judges of what God has ACTUALLY joined together. That is the point of declarations of nullity. It is a declaration that God never joined this man and this woman, because they failed to follow the requisite form, or did not intend to actually contract a Christian marriage.
"That you may eat and drink at my table, in my kingdom: and may sit upon thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel." (St. Luke 22.30, also St. Matthew 19.28) and "Take heed to yourselves, and to the whole flock, wherein the Holy Ghost hath placed you bishops, to rule the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood." (Acts 20.28)
Nowhere does the bible say unless there are any vows that are "irregular" and can be declared so by the church.
So if a polygamous pagan man converts to your reformed Church, does he get to keep all of his wives because he made a marriage vow to all of them?
It was not until the middle ages that the church claimed authority over marriage
The Nuptial Mass is present in the very earliest Sacramentaries of the Roman Church (Leonine, Gelasian, and Gregorian, all dating from the time of the late Roman Empire).
St. Ambrose, from the 4th century, writes: "Since the contracting of marriage must be sanctified by the veiling and the blessing of the priest, how can there be any mention of a marriage, when unity of faith is wanting?" (Epistle 19.7, To Vigilius).
Tertullian, in the 3rd century writes: "How can we describe the happiness of those marriages which the Church ratifies, the sacrifice strengthens, the blessing seals, the angels publish, the Heavenly Father propitiously beholds?" (To His Wife, 2.9)
St. Ignatius of Antioch in the very early 2nd century writes to St. Polycarp: "But it becomes both men and women who marry, to form their union with the approval of the bishop, that their marriage may be according to God, and not after their own lust." (Epistle to Polycarp, 5)
The Middle Ages are not commonly thought of as including the time period from AD 100 to AD 600, when those statements ceom from. But it is clear that the Catholic Church has claimed authority over marriage from its very beginning.
So there is no biblical precedent for the church to make the determination that any marriage is invalid
What then is this instruction from St. Paul? "If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she consent to dwell with him, let him not put her away. And if any woman hath a husband that believeth not, and he consent to dwell with her, let her not put away her husband. ... But if the unbeliever depart, let him depart. For a brother or sister is not under servitude in such cases. But God hath called us in peace." (1 Corinthians 7.12-13, 15)
If the pagan marriage was always valid after the conversion of one of the parties if the other party now wishes to seperate, St. Paul could not give such an instruction.