What does the record show about Joseph Smith’s plural marriages?

Yes. The Church essay says she was sealed several months before her 15th birthday. It also says Helen later described it as “for eternity alone,” suggesting no sexual relationship. That distinction matters, but it does not make her age or the power difference unimportant.

You state both the age and the essay’s qualification without using one to cancel the other.

She was nearly 15, so it was basically an adult marriage by the standards of the time.

The essay itself calls marriage at that age inappropriate by today’s standards. Historical legality and Helen’s later description do not settle the ethical question.

The Church essay says the exact number is unknown and estimates about 30–40 sealings. It distinguishes time-and-eternity from eternity-only sealings; the sources do not establish the same kind of relationship in every case.

You give the approximate estimate and preserve the essay’s distinction and uncertainty.

He had 30–40 sexual relationships, because sealing meant marriage.

The essay explicitly distinguishes two kinds of sealing and says some women described eternity-only relationships. A sealing count is not evidence of sexual relations in every case.

The Church essay says some described eternity-only sealings and offers family-linking as one possible explanation, while acknowledging other cases are unclear. Those records establish sealings, not each woman’s private understanding or freedom to refuse. The age and authority differences deserve serious scrutiny.

You report the proposed explanation as a possibility and do not infer consent or coercion beyond what the evidence establishes.

They stayed in their husbands’ homes, so they clearly consented and nothing else was going on.

Living arrangements are relevant evidence, but they cannot establish what every woman understood or felt. The essay says records are thin and some cases remain unexplained.

Section 132 presents plural marriage as a command under conditions, including a wife’s consent, and also records a warning to Emma and a provision if she rejected the law. The Church essay says Emma approved some marriages for a time, opposed the practice at other times, and likely did not know every sealing. The text shows what the revelation says; sparse records cannot fully recover Emma’s experience.

You distinguish the revelation’s authorization and conditions from what is known about Emma, while facing the warning directly.

The scripture says God commanded it, so Emma’s objections and the power dynamics are irrelevant.

A religious claim does not erase Emma’s recorded opposition or the revelation’s warning. The sources warrant an honest account of both belief and difficulty.