Joseph Smith and Postitution Rumors

[Don Bradley]

Craig,

Having gathered several hundred sources on Joseph Smith's polygamy, I can attest that a host of accounts from disaffected 19th century Mormons have proved invaluable in providing clues to Smith's polygamy. In fact, the earliest contemporary publications about Joseph's polygamy were from the disaffected John C. Bennett, who broke the news to the world--and to most of the church--that Joseph Smith had multiple wives.

Relative to most of those sources I would rank Sarah Pratt's late-life statements as exceptionally low in reliability within this group. While they certainly should be consulted to see what clues they can provide, they have a strong tendency to attribute to Joseph Smith statements and practices that other, much earlier sources attribute to John C. Bennett.

For instance, the late-life Sarah Pratt, alone among the many sources, Mormon and ex-Mormon, attributes to Joseph Smith the profound theological tenet "God doesn't care if we have a good time as long as nobody else finds out." Sources at the actual time, however--in 1842, attribute this line to John C. Bennett and others following his Nauvoo free-love system. Pratt also (as you note) says Joseph used abortions to keep from having children. Earlier sources level this accusation only at Bennett himself--that he used abortions to hide his own liaisons. (Note also that if Smith had proposed to women with the idea that they would produce a righteous seed, then having that desired seed destroyed before it came to fruition would have undermined the entire logic of his polygamy.) Similarly, Sarah Pratt accused Joseph of prostitution, but the contemporary records--the 1842 testimonies of the women involved--document only Bennett and his free-love spiritual wifery gang paying women for sex.

If these same things were true of Joseph Smith, it's remarkable that we would hear about them only four decades later and from one particularly embittered source (who seems to conflate Joseph Smith and John C. Bennett) but not from any of the other witnesses, either believing or alienated.

This isn't about whether the alienated can be good sources (they manifestly can) nor about whether Joseph Smith's polygamous practice should be subjected to serious and even severe ethical critique (it should). It's about whether this particular source is a very good one. It's not.

Don

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

Hi Don,

Since we have your attention, are you aware of any updates regarding the DNA testing Ugo Perego, or anyone else for that matter, regarding Joseph Smith polygamous activities? I think there were some hits, I don't recall all the details at this time ref Lyons, Sessions, and another male somewhere, and I know there's been some reluctance by other possible progeny who weren't interested in participating in Perego's project. I guess what I'm getting at is with the advent of DNA services like 23andme has there been any movement on this question?

- Doc

[dastardly stem]

Craig,

Having gathered several hundred sources on Joseph Smith's polygamy, I can attest that a host of accounts from disaffected 19th century Mormons have proved invaluable in providing clues to Smith's polygamy. In fact, the earliest contemporary publications about Joseph's polygamy were from the disaffected John C. Bennett, who broke the news to the world--and to most of the church--that Joseph Smith had multiple wives.

Relative to most of those sources I would rank Sarah Pratt's late-life statements as exceptionally low in reliability within this group. While they certainly should be consulted to see what clues they can provide, they have a strong tendency to attribute to Joseph Smith statements and practices that other, much earlier sources attribute to John C. Bennett.

For instance, the late-life Sarah Pratt, alone among the many sources, Mormon and ex-Mormon, attributes to Joseph Smith the profound theological tenet "God doesn't care if we have a good time as long as nobody else finds out." Sources at the actual time, however--in 1842, attribute this line to John C. Bennett and others following his Nauvoo free-love system. Pratt also (as you note) says Joseph used abortions to keep from having children. Earlier sources level this accusation only at Bennett himself--that he used abortions to hide his own liaisons. (Note also that if Smith had proposed to women with the idea that they would produce a righteous seed, then having that desired seed destroyed before it came to fruition would have undermined the entire logic of his polygamy.) Similarly, Sarah Pratt accused Joseph of prostitution, but the contemporary records--the 1842 testimonies of the women involved--document only Bennett and his free-love spiritual wifery gang paying women for sex.

If these same things were true of Joseph Smith, it's remarkable that we would hear about them only four decades later and from one particularly embittered source (who seems to conflate Joseph Smith and John C. Bennett) but not from any of the other witnesses, either believing or alienated.

This isn't about whether the alienated can be good sources (they manifestly can) nor about whether Joseph Smith's polygamous practice should be subjected to serious and even severe ethical critique (it should). It's about whether this particular source is a very good one. It's not.

Don

I can appreciate this response, Don. I'd be curious though, what would be the difference between "prostitution", on Sarah Pratt's accusation, and what Joseph actually did practice? Was having sex with teenagers without his first wife's consent, after having been supposedly married by the Church to each other, significantly different then whatever it was Sarah was referring to? It certainly doesn't seem like Sarah is accusing Joseph of much more than sleeping with another woman. It also doesn't seem like she's mistaking Joseph for John C. Bennett in her story. The story seems to fit precisely with what Joseph had done anyways. He went around visiting women while trying to hide said relationships, correct?

[Moksha]

I'd be curious though, what would be the difference between "prostitution", on Sarah Pratt's accusation, and what Joseph actually did practice?

Using trickery, barter, and other manipulation techniques shows the frailty of Men. Payment in coin shows Priestcraft and allegiance with the deviltry of Adam Smith and his capitalism (assuming the women would not accept three dollar bills from the Kirkland Safety Society Anti-Banking Company).

[Craig Paxton]

Craig,
If these same things were true of Joseph Smith, it's remarkable that we would hear about them only four decades later and from one particularly embittered source (who seems to conflate Joseph Smith and John C. Bennett) but not from any of the other witnesses, either believing or alienated.

This isn't about whether the alienated can be good sources (they manifestly can) nor about whether Joseph Smith's polygamous practice should be subjected to serious and even severe ethical critique (it should). It's about whether this particular source is a very good one. It's not.

Don

Thanks Don, I hold you and your historical work in high regard. I appreciate your perspective on this matter

[dastardly stem]

I'd be curious though, what would be the difference between "prostitution", on Sarah Pratt's accusation, and what Joseph actually did practice?

Using trickery, barter, and other manipulation techniques shows the frailty of Men. Payment in coin shows Priestcraft and allegiance with the deviltry of Adam Smith and his capitalism (assuming the women would not accept three dollar bills from the Kirkland Safety Society Anti-Banking Company).

lol, Moksha.

But I don't even see Sarah saying he paid for sex, as we call prostitution these days. It seems he had, perhaps, a wife who lived next door to Sarah Pratt at some point. And it appears, a lady who ran a brothel, either herself, or one or two of her women had relations with him. Joseph might have gotten sealed to any of them, knowing his attempts at secrecy. I can't see why Don is determined to see this as different from what he was already doing. It seems to fit. Granted, we'd need more information than these accusations to verify they actually happened as Pratt describes, but its kind of like, what's the point? We already know he did these types of things anyway.

[Dr Exiled]

Using trickery, barter, and other manipulation techniques shows the frailty of Men. Payment in coin shows Priestcraft and allegiance with the deviltry of Adam Smith and his capitalism (assuming the women would not accept three dollar bills from the Kirkland Safety Society Anti-Banking Company).

lol, Moksha.

But I don't even see Sarah saying he paid for sex, as we call prostitution these days. It seems he had, perhaps, a wife who lived next door to Sarah Pratt at some point. And it appears, a lady who ran a brothel, either herself, or one or two of her women had relations with him. Joseph might have gotten sealed to any of them, knowing his attempts at secrecy. I can't see why Don is determined to see this as different from what he was already doing. It seems to fit. Granted, we'd need more information than these accusations to verify they actually happened as Pratt describes, but its kind of like, what's the point? We already know he did these types of things anyway.

Yeah, Joseph Smith paid for it using made up spiritual currency and Bennett paid cash. They both were womanizers and perhaps Pratt's story isn't as reliable but I agree there isn't much of a distinction.

[Bought Yahoo]

They were never divorced. I could be wrong, but she and Orson entered the SL Valley as a married couple. Of course, she was always an apostate and one of her sons became a notorious polygamist hunter,

Sarah likely had an affair with John C Bennett and was thus pointing lots of fingers.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

They were never divorced. I could be wrong, but she and Orson entered the SL Valley as a married couple. Of course, she was always an apostate and one of her sons became a notorious polygamist hunter,

Sarah likely had an affair with John C Bennett and was thus pointing lots of fingers.

I am a ruined man! My future prospects are blasted! The testimony upon both sides seems to be equal: The one in direct contradiction to the other—how to decide I know not neither does it matter for let it be either way my temporal happiness is gone in this world if the testimonies of my wife and others are true then I have been deceived for twelve years past—my hopes are blasted and gone as it were in a moment—my long toils and labors have been in vain. If on the other hand the other testimonies are true then my family are ruined forever. Where then is my hope in this world? It is gone—gone not to be recovered!! Oh God, why is it thus with me! My sorrows are greater than I can bear! Where I am henceforth it matters not. - OP

If Joseph Smith’s character was beyond reproach, would Orson Pratt really have believed John C. Bennett’s account? It would’ve been an absurdity.

- Doc

[Tator]

I wouldn't put it past our former hero to have gone to see prostitutes in between his other conquests. What's an addict gonna do?

Right, not many options for our former hero addict, after all he couldn't abuse the little factory.