I refer to the letter Religious leaders must say no to gov't titles which raised a point worthy of our reflection. As a society which still emphasises religious beliefs and values via the second tenet of the Rukunegara (irrespective of which religion a Malaysian may profess), I wonder how Malaysians (irrespective of religion) may respond to this.

Given his/her letter, MBP is obviously concerned that religious leaders who accept government titles will shirk their obligations and see themselves as high and mighty; rendering themselves unapproachable.

Rightly so, and MBP and many other like-minded Malaysians are validly concerned. After all, answering the call as a priest or bishop means having to do away with certain things and social titles is definitely one of them.

It is hard to say whether any situation would render a religious leader accepting a government title as ‘acceptable’, but as always, there are two sides to a story. In adding to MBP’s concerns, apart from religious leaders breaking their vows of humility/poverty, it would also mean the end of the integrity of the religious leader and the institution he was entrusted to lead.

After all, how can the anti-ISA bishop/priest/ulama receive a datukship from a government who threatens the ISA on every Malaysian?

But again, the situation is not always this sticky. Some religious institutions do work for the good of the Malaysian community and rightfully, the government awards titles to the religious leaders in recognition of the good work that they/their institution have done for the community.

For example, a priest may be given a title in recognition fo the work of his parish church in expanding educational opportunities for the poor and illiterate.

However, as we are on the topic of leaders, how are we to speculate if these leaders are accepting on behalf of their institutions or are they accepting for themselves? Only the God that they and we worship will be able to tell. Some institutions believe that if they are going to be honoured, their leader should go as he is the leader and ‘face’ of the institution.

It would be honourable for a normal commoner from to receive an award on behalf of his religious group but that will not happen in a long time unless his leader says so.

The Catholic Church, by way of St Ignatius of Antioch (d. 110) tells us that the presence of a leader (bishop) simply means the presence of the Church community. This would imply that the title bestowed on a bishop would be a title bestowed on the Church; the Christian community sharing a part of this recognition.

So if the Catholic archbishop has received a ‘Tan Sri’ or ‘Dato’, it would in one way symbolise that every Catholic under his care is also a ‘Tan Sri or ‘Dato’. Of course, we shouldn’t go around parading these titles, but we should never deny the fact that we are able to be commended for our service to the communities of the nation.

While the abuse of titles will never cease, at least we know that sometimes leaders get what they deserve. Nevertheless, in all that, a religious leader must never be swayed upon receiving titles but continue to strive for what is right, even if it clashes with the stand of the government who has awarded or intends to award a title on him.

A religious leader must never defy his conscience and must hold himself accountable to no one except God.