I am God’s dog; a thankless commission. A dog is a dog, whether a White House first dog or a Kiteezi street mongrel. No special respect.
It is assumed that you are all right as long as you have your evening meal and a bone to nibble at. As God’s dog, even my ultimate master, the Lord Almighty, is in a state of divine rest. He can neither endorse nor reject my work.
God’s men, the priests, are different. They command a good measure of respect. They are at liberty to collect taxes (or tithes) and other fees from their followers, and they are not always strictly obliged to give detailed accountability to their followers beyond what is agreed within their administrative structures.
If the man of God is an independent operator with his own church, it gets even better. He can collect money on the pretext of constructing a mega church and use some of the cash to buy a fat SUV before starting the building. His wife and top confidant, who is usually also a pastor at the same church, is very unlikely to object.
The benefits do not end there. If you have the instincts of an even more hardwired fixer, you could not design a criminal operation, lure victims and execute the plot with a better cover than being a recognised man of God.
In spite of evidence to the contrary, there is a persistent assumption in the population that men of God are honest people.
The men of God embrace this myth and blow their trumpet whenever and wherever an opportunity presents itself.
In reality, some men of God are fairly honest. Most are nauseatingly hypocritical, especially when they are dealing with rich people and the political class. And a few are outright crooks. But because of the assumption that they are good men, it usually takes a long time and a bit of courage before the crooks are exposed.
Out of respect, major newspapers and broadcasters usually only report an alleged crime involving a prominent cleric after they have seen the fire under the smoke.
For instance, one newspaper recently published the story of two American investors who allege that a pastor conned them of billions in a dubious gold-mining venture, the paper was careful to give very detailed accounts. Clearly, the editors were keen to assure their readers that the story was thoroughly researched before the alleged Mafia-styled side of the man of God was exposed in the press.
The same attention to detail was evident when another newspaper recently published a story in which a Sheikh and others are alleged to have defrauded someone of Shs1.2b in another gold deal.
The men of God are usually quite adept at choosing their victims. They carefully identify who is both gullible and has money. They read the body language of the victim, and at every stage they take full advantage of the traditional trust many people have in men of God.
So, in practice, a man of God can usually buy plenty of time before the victim fully wakes up to the reality that he has been robbed.
Coupled with the fact that government investigators and the media tend to hesitate before going full-throttle after men of God, it becomes evident that the smartest and safest cover for wrongdoing may be the label: A man of God.