Wayment: Joseph Smith’s Description of Paul the Apostle 39 Joseph Smith’s Description of Paul the Apostle Thomas A. Wayment Discussions by scholars about Joseph Smith’s January 5, 1841, Nauvoo Lyceum teachings in which he offered a tantalizing physical description of the New Testament apostle Paul have long recognized a parallel description of Paul found in the pseudepigraphical Acts of Paul (1.11).1 Unfortunately, however, it is not obvious that Joseph Smith directly borrowed from the Acts of Paul description, or whether the description should be considered revela- tory. Without further methodological considerations, the problem of whether Joseph Smith used the Acts of Paul as the foundation of his statement will likely continue to plague interpretations by Mormon scholars.2 Under consideration are two statements that purport to describe Paul’s physical characteristics, one of which makes the claim to offer a firsthand account of Paul in the city of Iconium while Paul was yet living; and the other given by Joseph Smith in 1841 in a context that has revelatory underpin- nings. Both accounts are rather brief and cannot be immediately described as resulting from direct copying or borrowing; or at least if there was borrowing of the Acts of Paul by Joseph Smith, it is not overt or obvious. The Acts of Paul were originally composed in Greek during the latter half of the second century AD, and the forger of the acts was actually identified in antiquity.3 The Acts of Paul were widely known in the early nineteenth century through a popular English translation that had wide circulation in the United States and England. However, despite the widespread circulation thomAs A. wAyment ([email protected]) is a professor of Ancient Scripture at Brigham Young University. He received his BA in Classics from the University of California at Riverside, and his MA and PhD degrees in New Testament Studies from the Claremont Graduate School. His research specialties include New Testament textual criticism, papyrology, and Christian history before the fourth century AD. He is a member of the Society of Biblical Literature and the American Society of Papyrologists. He recently published a new fragment of the Infancy Gospel of James from the collection of papyri at the Cairo Museum. 40 Mormon Historical Studies Joseph and Emma Smith’s Homestead, Nauvoo, Illinois, September 30, 2011. On Tuesday, January 5, 1841, the fi rst meeting of the Nauvoo Lyceum, an adult school of instruction, was held in the Smith home. The lyceum generally met weekly at different locations in Nauvoo. During his remarks at the inaugural meeting, the Prophet gave a brief description of the ancient apostle Paul. Photograph by Alexander L. Baugh. of the English translation and even the fairly certain conclusion that Joseph Smith owned a copy of that translation, it is not obvious that he borrowed directly from the Acts of Paul. To help clarify and shed light on this question, this article explores a distant genetic relationship between Joseph Smith’s description of Paul and the Acts of Paul. This conclusion is based on the use of text-critical tools that have been developed to distinguish the direction of textual borrowing among the New Testament authors Matthew, Mark, and Luke. Moreover, a new and alternative explanation as to the source and purpose of Joseph’s description of Paul will be proposed. William Hone, The Apocryphal New Testament With reference to the Apocrypha, it is important to distinguish between two types of publications of “Apocrypha”: (1) the Apocrypha which were published in some printings of the Bible and which were available to Joseph Smith; and (2) literally hundreds of other Christian writings that were never Wayment: Joseph Smith’s Description of Paul the Apostle 41 part of the Christian canon but were valued and copied by Christians. These latter texts contain the Acts of Paul, where the physical description of Paul is found, whereas the former do not. It is important therefore, to discuss whether Joseph had access to the Acts of Paul and not to the other apocryphal writings generally, or to the Apocrypha that were printed in many English editions of the Bible in the nineteenth century.4 Available to most English speakers was the publication of a large body of apocryphal writings that were eclectic by modern standards and were based on what are now considered inferior medieval manuscripts in Greek and Latin. Although William Hone is better known for his political satires and cutting critiques of nineteenth century British government, the opportunistic editor published in 1820 an edition of the New Testament Apocrypha which he hoped would bring to light a number of otherwise neglected texts. Little could Hone have anticipated that the publication of The Apocryphal New Testament would be wildly popular and eventually enjoy nine different printings: three in England, each of which was published in London (1820, 1821, and 1824), and six in the United States—Boston (1821, 1832), Buffalo (1824), Philadelphia (1825), and two Ohio editions (1832, 1835). Each of the American editions would have been available for purchase in the regions where Joseph Smith lived and where the nascent Church of Christ, and later the Church of the Latter Day Saints, were present.5 It is very unlikely that Joseph Smith would have had access to any of the eighteenth century English printings of the Apocrypha used by William Hone, and no evidence has surfaced that he was able to gain access to the much older editions of Jones or Wake in any of the traveling libraries to which the Mormon leader might have been a patron. By Joseph Smith’s day, the eighteenth century editions were largely of antiquar- ian or academic interest; popular interest in them was relatively non-existent. The evidence for Joseph Smith’s ownership of a copy William Hone’s Apocryphal New Testament is conclu- sive. In January 1844, the Prophet met with other leading citizens of Nauvoo to discuss the organization and creation of the Nauvoo Library and Literary Society. Subsequent to that meeting a number of books were donated by him to William Hone portrait by William the fl edgling library, and among them was Patten, National Portrait Gallery, an Apocryphal Testament. That volume, London, England. 42 Mormon Historical Studies Nauvoo Library and Literary Institute ledger. The ledger shows Joseph Smith’s donations to the library. The eleventh entry records that he donated William Hone’s Apocryphal New Testament to the library, indicating that he owned the book. Image courtesy LDS Church History Library, Salt Lake City, Utah. Wayment: Joseph Smith’s Description of Paul the Apostle 43 entitled the Apocryphal Testament, can confi dently be identifi ed as an edition of William Hone’s Apocryphal New Testament, and it is certain that at some point before 1844 Joseph Smith came to possess a copy of Hone’s edition.6 Because no record survives that details the purchase of the book, it is not pos- sible to say when he came to own the volume. Signifi cantly, it appears that the Apocryphal New Testament was used in a September 1842 article printed in the Times and Seasons, since the article makes reference to the Protevangelium of James.7 Although it was probably William W. Phelps who actually authored the material that quotes from Title page from William Hone’s The the Protevangelium, it does show Apocryphal New Testament (London: that there was open usage of Hone in Ludgate Hill, 1820). Nauvoo as early as 1842.8 Thus, based on the fi rm evidence that Joseph Smith owned a copy of William Hone’s Apocryphal New Testament, that he donated that copy to the Nauvoo Library, and that there is evidence that it was used as a source in the Times and Seasons as early as 1842, we can reasonably conclude that Hone’s English translation was available to, and was likely consulted by, Joseph Smith. Further analysis will determine whether he used Hone’s Acts of Paul as a source for his description of the apostle Paul in his 1841 Lyceum remarks. The Sources Some of the standard text-critical tools used to determine a shared textual tradition within the biblical canon are the repetition of short phrases between sources, the use of unique vocabulary or grammatical forms, shared ordering of events, and the detection of similar contexts or settings. From a text-critical standpoint, the Acts of Paul and Joseph Smith’s description of Paul immediately stand out because of the shared context: a physical portrait of Paul.9 Additionally, textual borrowing can be in only one direction, because the two sources are separated by over 1,500 years. Assuming then the possibility of at least a shared tradition, it is important to further analyze 44 Mormon Historical Studies Table 1 Acts of Paul (AP) Joseph Smith (JS) 1:7 At length they saw a man com- He is about five foot high; very ing (namely Paul), of a low stature, dark hair; dark complexion; dark bald (or shaved) on the head, skin; large Roman nose; sharp face; crooked thighs, handsome legs, hol- small black eyes, penetrating as low-eyed; had a crooked nose; full eternity; round shoulders; a whin- of grace; for sometimes he had the ing voice, except when elevated countenance of an angel. And Paul and then it almost resembles the saw Onesiphorus, and was glad.10 roaring of a Lion.11 the two traditions using available text critical methodology (see Table 1, bold showing potential overlap). The reader is immediately struck by the limited shared vocabulary of the two sources, albeit both descriptions exhibit a certain vague sense of overlap. Even though similar physical features are mentioned, they are some- times opposites: “bald (or shaved) on the head” (AP) versus “very dark hair” (JS), “crooked nose” (AP) versus “large Roman nose,” (JS) or “hollow-eyed” (AP) versus “small black eyes” (JS).12 The latter comparison could indeed be interpreted to have a similar intent, but “hollow eyes” and “penetrating” seem to convey different ideas. These pairings of opposites or quasi-opposites suggest a corrective effort or tendency between the two reports, namely those attributes that in the modern world could be considered negatives: crooked thighs, hollow-eyed, and crooked nose are either skipped over or adjusted into more positive terminology.13 Indeed, the only potentially demeaning feature of Joseph’s description is the rather short height of five feet. It might also be worth noting that the ordering of the two descriptions is similar in some minor ways: height, hair, nose and eyes in reverse order, with a general description of the impact of Paul’s appearance. This final similarity might be enough to inextricably connect the two accounts because the general similarities can be accounted for on the grounds that a physical description of anyone would involve a certain degree of overlapping criteria, but the fact that each ends with what is obviously overt praise for Paul is telling. Even in the final descriptions the two accounts diverge in significant ways, the AP Wayment: Joseph Smith’s Description of Paul the Apostle 45 description drawing attention to Paul’s appearance in a way that deifies his physicality, and the JS account drawing attention to the power of Paul’s voice. It is my firm conclusion that from a text-critical standpoint there is only limited evidence of textual borrowing and that the AP description is at best a faded memory that is reworked in the JS account.14 If there is some type of tenuous remembered connection between the two, then the relationship between the two accounts is likely corrective. A note of caution is in order. It might be assumed that Joseph Smith’s description is revelatory in nature and that he distantly remembered the AP description and then added to it from a revelation in which he had seen and heard Paul in a dream or vision. This conclusion needs to be considered in light of the fact that the larger context of the description given in Joseph Smith’s account does reveal some relationship to the Acts of Paul and thus solidifies the relationship between the two. The context of the Joseph Smith description is eventually the key piece of evidence that unlocks the textual relationship. In this regard, text-critical methodology can further the discussion significantly. When the original context of the Nauvoo Lyceum statement is considered, it becomes apparent that Joseph’s description of Paul was originally given in a setting where John C. Bennett was being introduced to the Lyceum audi- ence as a guest of some distinction. Immediately after describing Paul, Joseph went on to say, “He was a good orator, but Doctor Bennett is a superior orator, and like Paul is active and deligent [sic], always employing himself in doing good to his fellow men.”15 What has not been noted in previous discussions of Joseph’s description of Paul is that it was actually given in part, or in whole, in the context of comparing Paul’s appearance to John C. Bennett, who had recently been baptized into the faith.16 Unfortunately, no surviving description of John C. Bennett’s physical appearance was directly authored by Joseph Smith, but from the few that have survived there are several remarkable convergences between what Bennett actually looked like and what the Prophet said of Paul. The sources for a description of Bennett’s physical appearance include a letter purportedly written by Sidney Rigdon to James Arlington Bennet (one “t”), a New York attorney, newspaper publisher, educator, and author.17 A second descrip- tion comes from a reporter’s brief sketch following an anti-Mormon speech Bennett gave in Boston in 1842.18 Finally, while residing in Iowa in 1843, Bennett was expelled from the Masonic Lodge, and a brief description of him was recorded in the minutes of the meeting at the time of his expulsion.19 Table 2 (below) includes Joseph Smith’s description of the apostle Paul along- side the three contemporary descriptions of John C. Bennett. Similarities are noted in bold. 46 Mormon Historical Studies History of the Grand Lodge of Iowa (H)(circa. 1843) John C. Bennett . . . about 38 years of age; 5 feet 7 or 8 inches high; dark complex-ion; dark eyes; Roman nose; lost his upper front teeth; quick spoken. Times and Seasons (T&S)(October 15, 1842) e feet nine inches h, with black eyes, ck hair sprinkled h gray, dark com-xion, and rather a n face. e 2 Fivhigblawitplethi bl Ta Sidney Rigdon (SR)Letter to James Arling-ton Bennet(April 14, 1842) General Bennett is five feet five inches high, one hun-dred and forty-two pounds’ weight, and thirty-seven years of age. He possesses much decision of character; honorable in his intercourse with his fellows, and a most agreeable companion; pos-sessing much vivacity and animation of spirit, and every way qualified to be a useful citizen, in this or any other city. Joseph Smith (JS)Nauvoo Lyceum(January 5, 1841) He is about five foot high; very dark hair; dark com-plexion; dark skin; large Roman nose; sharp face; small black eyes, penetrating as eternity; round shoulders; a whining voice, except when elevated and then it almost resembles the roaring of a Lion. He was a good orator, but Doctor Bennett is a su-perior orator, and like Paul is active and deligent [sic], always employing himself in doing good to his fellow men. Wayment: Joseph Smith’s Description of Paul the Apostle 47 John C. Bennett engraving, in History of the Saints, or, An exposé of Joe Smith and Mormonism (Boston: Leland & Whiting, 1842), frontispiece. Image courtesy L. Tom Perry Special Collections, Harold B. Lee Library, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah. 48 Mormon Historical Studies A comparison of Joseph Smith’s description of Paul with the three contemporary accounts describing John C. Bennett reveals several striking similarities. According to Joseph Smith, Paul had “very dark hair” (JS), while one account describes Bennett as having “black hair sprinkled with gray” (T&S). In describing the ancient apostle’s complexion, the Prophet stated he had “dark complexion; dark skin” (JS), while two of the three descriptions of Bennett state he had “dark complexion” (T&S, H). Further, Smith described Paul as having a “large Roman nose” (JS), a feature noticeably similar to the Masonic description of Bennett (H), and a fact confirmed in the engraving of him which appeared in the front of Bennett’s book History of the Saints, or, An exposé of Joe Smith and Mormonism. The Mormon leader described Paul as having a “sharp face” (JS), terminology comparable to that in the Times and Seasons account, which depicts Bennett “having a rather thin face” (T&S). Joseph Smith stated that Paul had “small black eyes” (JS), where one account has Bennett having “dark eyes” (H), while another says “black eyes” (T&S). Finally, the Prophet concludes his description of Paul with the detail that he was “active and deligent [sic], always employing himself in doing good to his fellow men” (JS). Perhaps this is what Sidney Rigdon was saying when he described Bennett as having “much vivacity and animation of spirit” (SR), whereas the Masonic description states he was “quick spoken” (H). There is one notable difference, however. Whereas Joseph Smith described Paul being rather short, “about five foot high” (JS),20 Rigdon wrote that Bennett stood five feet five inches tall (SR); while the account published in the Times and Seasons states he was five feet nine (T&S); and the Masonic report indicates he was five feet seven or eight inches in height (H). Apart from this difference, the remaining corresponding details strongly suggest that Joseph Smith used Paul as a model or illustration to introduce the distinguished Bennett to the Lyceum audience. From a text-critical standpoint, I conclude that the source of Joseph Smith’s description of Paul did not come exclusively from the descrip- tion given in the Acts of Paul. While the Acts of Paul may have provided a structure for Joseph Smith’s description, and may have played a distant role as a source, that text is not the most important source. Furthermore, while some have interpreted Joseph Smith’s description of Paul as originating in a revelatory experience, in actuality, the Mormon leader was simply comparing John C. Bennett with the ancient apostle as a form of flattery. Joseph Smith and Ancient Stereotypes I originally set out to establish an inherent link, if one existed, between Joseph Smith’s description of Paul and the ancient description of the apostle