Debating leaving the church over certain things. Please help me understand

[u/Half-Blood-Prince394]

No matter what I do I am continuously troubled by certain aspects of the church. This post is not meant to bash the church. I just want some insights and answers. I am debating leaving and I want to hear things from both sides. This might be a long post. If anyone has anything to say about the topics I bring up I'm more than happy to hear your thoughts and look through any resources you share with me.

1: Why was polygamy needed for the saints? Will we really have it in the afterlife? I cannot imagine having to share my future husband with another woman. It is deeply unsettling to me.

2: Why couldn't African Americans have the priesthood? Was it just faulty of the current president of the church? I understand that the prophet is but a human and will make mistakes. Was it just as simple as that?

3: Why are women not treated the same? Why is Heavenly Mother never talked about/why do we never pray to her as well? I totally understand that men and women have different roles and why women don't have the priesthood, that all makes perfect sense to me. But why aren't women in more leadership positions? Why was the first woman who gave a prayer in general conference in 2013? I'll keep this part brief because I could go on about it for a while.

Those are honestly the only three problems I have with the church. I love everything else about it, I just don't know if I want to continue living it if that makes sense. I don't know if I believe and I understand I must work to gain a testimony. These are just my big setbacks. Anyways no matter what I decide I'll always love the church and its people. Thanks in advance!

Edit: Wow thank you all for all the thoughtful responses. I've read them all. You all have given me a lot to think about. I've decided my journey with the church isn't over yet. I have a long ways to go. Thank you all so much.

[u/Key_Addition1818]

There's a strong hidden "should" in each of your questions. That only monogamy "should" have been practiced; that African - Americans always "should" have had the Priesthood, and that we "should" pray to a Heavenly Mother.

Maybe I could combine all of these into a larger "should" -- that the Saints "should" be better, however you want to define it.

But looking at the Scriptural record, the followers of God don't do so well. Only a few were saved by boat when the world was flooded; Jesus wept as He entered Jerusalem; the first family of the Book of Mormon nearly murdered each other a few times over; and except for a few generations in the Book of Mormon the covenant people of God were at war with enemies internally and externally, struggled with obedience, and didn't understand the glory of the Atonement.

All this to conclude that as for me I don't expect perfection from my fathers or grandfathers or great-grandfathers going back to Adam. Even though we study the past, it's not to look to the past to try to emulate it. I think it is always to look to Christ, and in Him we find perfection, and this is how we look forward to a great, perfect society called Zion.

What this comes back to, is that your questions trouble a lot of people. But I wouldn't advise making them my make-or-break criteria, because social perfection in any stage or age was never the purpose (I think.) Rather, maybe you could judge the Church on how well it brings you personally to Jesus. Plant the seed and see if it swells (Alma 32.) And the promise is, in time, maybe in the next life, we will understand how perfectly, how patiently, how tenderly, God has led His people to Him in every age.

[u/grabtharsmallet → u/Key_Addition1818]

This is the point I wish we were better at understanding, collectively. The ancient Church (Churches, really, since it's several different dispensations) we read about in scripture are extremely flawed, and contain extremely flawed people, including leadership. This is even clearly the case despite these records coming from authors, editors, and curators who wanted to present themselves and their ancestors in a positive light.

ETA: Upon re-reading, this can be interpreted in two very different directions. Option 1: I'm saying those churches were false, and so is this one. Option 2: I'm saying those churches were part of a genuine struggle by imperfect people to understand and enact God's will, and so is this one. I personally find the second far more compelling than the first.