[Meletus]

>>I would stick with the unchaste definition (meaning an unlawful incestious "marriage"). I think using the word "adultery" has done much disservice to the faithful.<<

I would hardly think that Joseph thought he was in danger of being in an incestuous relationship with Mary.

[1stFreedom]

You bring up an interesting point, but I think I have a good answer:

>>Matthew inserts the exception clause in order to exonerate Joseph and show that the kind of divorce that one might pursue during a betrothal on account of fornication, is not included in what Jesus had said.

Betrothal in the Jewish tradition is not relavant today. Also, notice that nowhere is it said that Joseph intended to remarry. The issue is not divorce, but remarriage after divorce.

I don't think that adultery does justice to this verse. While unchastity in the incestious sense isn't very relative today, it does more justice to the passage and is closer to the intent. Using fornication or adultery as the word for Pornea simply "gives" people the permission they need to remarry after divorce -- which is actually not permitted.