English Language Resources Online - series on leadership, power, politics, part 12

English Language Resources Online - series on leadership, power, politics, part 12

Here is yet another short assignment written by me, for the topic of Virtue and Leadership. In many ways, my site has expanded from merely literary topics to religious topics and now onto leadership, power and politics.

This is a unique take on a virtuous leader, combining virtue with leadership.


In what ways is Moses a virtuous leader and in what ways does he fail as a leader in the episode of the Golden Calf?
Shawn S.

Moses is a virtuous leader in that he fulfils the role of religious leader with a divine mission assigned to him by God, and we see his virtue as a leader by contrast with Aaron. Yet, Moses also has shortcomings as a leader, because his anger and passion lead him to make very bold moves, which can be construed either charitably as strong, righteous leadership, or non-charitably, mere anger, even irreverence. However, Moses is in the difficult position of being accountable as a leader, not just to his people, but also to God, and this adds another level of complexity to the question.

Basically, Moses is a virtuous religious leader because of his fidelity to God and His mission, to bring the Hebrews as the chosen people to the Promised Land. We can see Moses’ virtues by comparison with Aaron, put in charge during Moses’ absence. Moses comes across as a loyal and faithful leader vis-à-vis Aaron, who can be construed as a kind of populist leader, who gives in easily to the crowd and their demands (Exodus 32:1-5). Moses adheres to God’s will, whereas Aaron gives in to crowd pressure; hence, basically, it can be said that Moses is a virtuous leader.

Furthermore, Moses is a virtuous leader because he has love for his people. For instance, in his defence of his people from God’s wrath, he invokes God’s promises: “I will multiply your descendants like the stars of heaven, and all this land I will give to them as an everlasting inheritance” (Exodus 32:13). This placates God. Moses later tries to intercede and obtain pardon for the transgression again (32:31). This shows that he is virtuous in his willingness to take responsibility and blame for the people’s transgression, because it shows his compassion and love, such that he is even willing to pay the ultimate price of his life, even though he had not been present during the fiasco. This is very much unlike Aaron who passes the blame to the people and makes excuses when confronted by Moses: “You know this people and how evil they are” (32:22). By this glib line, Aaron lays the blame on the people and not himself. Relating the incident, Aaron secretly omits his role (32:24). Aaron can thus be seen as a classic case of a non-virtuous leader: he engages in fault-finding, takes no responsibility, and conjures impossible excuses such as the impossible emergence of a golden calf from fire. Thus, we establish Moses’ virtue in handling the situation by comparison with Aaron, who has neglected his responsibilities.

However, Moses’ major problem is his anger – anger leading to the smashing of the tablets with God’s writing (32:19). One might say that such a reaction shows a lack of self control, and might be not virtuous or becoming as a leader. Moses is supposed to be a prophetic leader, a religious leader with God’s words, and yet anger causes him to smash the tablets from God. Hence, surely Moses’ anger got the better of him. Yet, the reaction is understandable, and it is hard to argue that righteous anger is misplaced, although there is indeed some overreaction of Moses’ own volition. However, it can be argued that this anger provokes strong leadership by Moses and immediate remedial action; while Aaron tries to buy time and weakly skews the issue back to God by declaring a “feastday for Yahweh” (32:5), Moses directly rebukes the people and burns the calf, forcing the people to drink water with powder from the idol as punishment, compared to inaction on Aaron’s part. Hence, it is difficult to simplistically say that Moses fails as a leader due to anger, because the situation is complex and multifaceted.

Indeed, Moses is more than angry; he is very passionate, and using drastic measures, he re-establishes his authority by killing the guilty perpetrators, using the fact that not everyone had participated in the event (32:26-29). Moses is a very bold person in this episode. He orders the Levites: “Go back and forth from door to door and don’t hesitate to kill even your brothers, your companions and your relatives” (32:27). This mass killing quells the rebellion against Yahweh and against Moses’ religious leadership. Perhaps it is a wrong question to ask if Moses has failings in this scenario, as there is a pressing need to restore order. Perhaps, while there is little virtuous leadership here in terms of a peaceful reconciliation, there is virtue here in restoring God’s will.

However, in the final analysis, most leaders are accountable only to their people, but Moses as a prophetic, religious leader is in a unique position of being both accountable to the people and to God, and in this episode, his greater responsibility was to God. This raises the question of the connection or relationship of a leader and his followers. Moses, as the people’s leader, has a responsibility to them, and on the other, also a responsibility to Yahweh, the God who is the very reason for the Hebrews’ escape from Egypt. Moses is both a follower of God as well as a leader of his own people. This enables us to see that his reactions to the episode of the Golden Calf and his suppression of the rebellion, though bold and harsh, were justified. In this light, in my opinion, Moses is a virtuous leader, to a very large extent.

The Bible: Exodus, 32.



English Language Resources Online

English Language essays, term papers, history essays, literature essays, GP essays, KI essays and other English language essay resources and essay materials for learning and essay research.