I just read an article in the New York Times entitled, "Clean-Cut and Classical: Mormon Siblings are Missionaries for Bach and Mozart Too." It tells of five Mormon siblings who have all gone to Julliard as pianists, and are starting a recording career as a quintet. It's all nice and heartwarming until the very end, when it talks about Gregory, who is graduating this year and has yet to serve a mission.

The article quotes Gregory as saying that Elder Robert D. Hales of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles had a personal conversation with him about whether or not to serve a mission right away. Elder Hales is quoted as saying that doing what he's doing (studying piano and signing a record deal with his siblings) is good enough to count as a mission. Gregory says his piano playing is "another sort of mission for me."

I don't know what the context of Elder Hales's remarks was. It seems he's a family friend (he performed the weddings of Gregory's older sisters), so it might have been a personal--not official--conversation. He might have said that it's OK to postpone your mission until you graduate--Gregory is planning on leaving this summer after graduation at age 21. In fact, I'm sure that's what he said, because I can't imagine a church leader telling someone he doesn't have to serve a mission because he's a really good pianist.

True, the Church will get some exposure and PR help from this family--the word "Mormon" is in big type on the front page of the Arts section of the Times. But I don't think being the best in your field--no matter what the field--is a waiver of the general commandment to serve a mission. I think if anyone should get an exemption from serving a mission, it should be sports stars or showbiz types, who really get media exposure (but I really don't think they should get one). How much media exposure is the Church really going to get from one-fifth of an obscure classical piano quintet? Even if it's a lot, wouldn't it be better for the church to say here are four siblings who would have been five, except that one brother loves the Lord so much he sacrificed doing this to teach people in Australia?

Sure, his skills would deteriorate on his mission. But so did Shawn Bradley's. Maybe Shawn really could have been the dominant basketball player he was hyped up to be if he hadn't gone on his mission. But do you think he regrets it for one minute? Does the Church, institutionally, regret it? Steve Young didn't serve a mission, brought lots of exposure to the church as Super Bowl MVP and so forth, and has said he regrets it.

If you get to break that commandment because you're the best in your field (something that I don't think Gregory has achieved yet, but let's assume it for the sake of argument), what other commandments do you get to break as well? What kind of example is he setting for his 18-year-old brother, also in the quintet? Do you think HE is going to serve a mission?

After all that ranting, let me repeat that the article states that Gregory plans to leave on his mission this summer. In the end, he made the right choice, and I think that is the choice Elder Hales advised him to make. My point is that I don't think Elder Hales, or any church leader, would encourage anyone to miss out on the experience of a mission in order to pursue any sort of a career.