83 finished work on the cross and cultivated in the Christian through the indwelling power of the Holy Spirit as the Christian experiences life and endures struggle.24 These two realities are summarized in the complementary ideas of justification (imputed righteousness) and sanctification (maturing righteousness).25 In truth, most leadership theories and models are built on outcomespecific behaviors rather than formational behaviors that grow a leader.26 This parallels a utilitarian or consequentialist moral tradition that interprets ethics through the lens of usefulness or outcomes rather than a virtue approach. This creates something of a moral Frankenstein where leadership studies attempt to piece together a recognizable caricature of positive leadership and then infuse their creation with a large jolt of moral expectation. Yet the same problem noted by Northouse and others persists: truly moral leadership is expected while charismatic leadership and short-term pragmatic outcomes are rewarded.27 Such an emphasis on “doing” rather than “becoming” is bound to cause confusion and contradiction in leadership studies. For example, Burns assumes a moral element to leadership. He offers value judgments on transformational leadership as the pinnacle of leadership, whereas transactional leadership is a baser category of leadership.28 Bass & Riggio take this a step further to see transactional and transformational as part of a continuum of leadership rather than separate categories.29 Yet, while transformational leadership is generally presented as an ideal form of leadership that transforms both leader and follower, its applications in leadership studies are largely directed toward merely external or situational outcomes.30 With this kind of circularity, then, transformational leadership is lauded for its moral and formational value while it is primarily studied for its pragmatic and transactional benefits. This is important to note because ethical leadership theories must conform to a particular view of morality and ethics, and much of the search for ethical leadership is due to the failures of leaders (even transformational ones) to behave morally.31 When morality is viewed through a utilitarian or consequentialist lens, it lends itself to transactional leadership that serves utilitarian or outcomeAN ETERNAL WEIGHT OF GLORY: EXPLORING SPIRITUAL DISCIPLINES AS POTENTIAL PREDICTORS OF RESILIENT PASTORAL LEADERSHIP
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy ODc4ODgx