Double Standard

[texinmi]

I am in RCIA and trying to understand the standards in the Catholic Church.

Members I have met in RCIA are great people and very passionate about their faith, theology, etc. I have been fortunate to meet people who love the Catholic Church and are very helpful. I am grateful for their patience.

The church has very strict standards for its members on contraception, abortion, marriage, sexuality, integrity, etc. There is no shortage of traditions, rituals, and guidelines.

When it comes to the leadership of the church, a different standard appears to apply than the standard that is preached. There have been very public scandals with priests and bishops. There is a cardinal that protests with criminals in favor of criminal behavior after shamelessly covering for priests who abused children. I have personally known a church official who would lie to anyone about anything at anytime.

The fact that these bad apples occur does not hinder me in my consideration of Catholicism. Any large organization will have members that disappoint. But the reaction of the leadership in these cases is mediocre and does not appear to be motivated by the same kind of fear and love of God that the church preaches to its members. I cannot picture the original apostles leaving a pedophile in charge of a day care center in an attempt at rehabilitation. If anything, the original apostles seemed to believe a high standard for leaders in the church was essential.

For those of you who are Catholic and have pondered this question, how do you deal with this double standard? How do you deal with a church that wants to tell you how to run your household, but can’t bring itself to remove a church official who undermines the church with criminal behavior? How do you listen to a sermon on the courage of the original apostles who died horrible deaths as a result of their faith, but the person delivering the sermon lacks the courage to fire criminals? What thought process do you use to feel respect for those too cowardly to protect the innocent and the image of the Church?

Do you think if you were not already Catholic, you would choose to enter the Church at this point in time? If you would, how would you reconcile the behavior of its leaders with its message?

 

[3DOCTORS]

By constantly keeping in mind that Jesus never intended for the church to have a double standard in that sense, in fact, several times he mentions that those in authority must be servants, that to those to whom much is given, from them much will be expected, and that anyone who harms His little ones, it would be better for a great millstone to be around their neck and they be drowned in the sea.

So, these people in the Church are accountable to God for any deliberate sins or scandals they have committed/caused. We need to clean house. But the Church as the Church is promised to endure till the end of time, guaranteed by Jesus Himself. This is precisely why Our Lord emphasized the need for the shepherds to be good shepherds.

Unfortunately, Satan tries to strike the current-day shepherds so that the sheep will be scattered, by tempting them to use their free will to make bad choices.

This is just off the top of my head, but maybe it will help some with your understanding.

We need to pray for our shepherds to be protected from the Devil’s influences. Constantly.

 

[DaveBj]

The Church in its earliest days was known to be holy because there was fear in it, and there was fear in it because of Ananias and Sapphira (Acts 5:1-11).

Nowadays the Church is not known for its holiness (certain individuals notwithstanding). The reason for that is that there is no fear in the Church, and the reason that there is no fear is that there are no Ananiases and Sappiras.

It has been said that if God does not punish America for its sin, He will have to apologize to Sodom and Gomorrah. I am of the belief that if He does not start striking down some prominent leaders of the Catholic Church, He should apologize to Ananias and Sapphira.

DaveBj

 

[GloriousOrder]

I am also coming into the Church as we speak, and many horrible excesses frighten me, simply on a daily, banal level. The worst of all is also the most salient and unabashed: clerical luncheon. In our basilica, the church hall has two connected kitchen-rooms that exit into a back corridor, which itself flowers out into the main hall. Inside this back corridor is a private meeting/dining room, the door to which is in full view of the main hall. This is the scene of the immorality.

Every single week day at 1:30 PM, the homeless food program opens in the main hall. Co-incidentally, the priests who have just celebrated Mass also happen to come down at 1:30 to use the private room. As the latter is fully and readily visible from the former, the homeless can very easily observe the movements of the priests and their guests, including the food for that afternoon. While our homeless outreach hands its unhealthy, rubbish sandwiches to the poor, filling them with salty bologna and poor-quality cheese, the same people see those priests feasting on the most sumptuous lamb and varieties of fish, paraded as it were in front of their very eyes.

Just this Wednesday, a homeless man came in and smelled haddock from the kitchens, thinking we had brought fish & chips for the poor! How sad I was to have to inform him of the reality that it was just for the priests; often, whole halves of meat are thrown out. Now, to be fair, diocesans do not take vows of poverty… but that does not eliminate them from our duty to the inherent natural-law morality. The priests, above all, should be eating the boring sandwiches and drinking the horrid juices, should they not? Instead, Our Lord the Poor must watch this grotesque parade of fat priests carting in gigantic deserts, laughing at some joke with the Archbishop! These men speak of mortification and goodness toward the poor on Sundays - who serves Mammon and the World? What is this nonsense?

I am able to cope with this because God is my Lord, and sin is throughout the world thanks to our own human fault. The river is corrupted at the source, and it is only with great effort that I myself have achieved some peace of conscience, despite still being arrogant, lazy, and always self-absorbed. I am convicted of my horrible sin, and sometimes it seems as if our local holy priests are not… this can be borne with a strong will, and with trust in God. The Church asks us to become perfect - it does not claim perfection.

 

[Prague]

Well, I think with my big mouth I would probably march right in and tell the priests they are a bad example of the Church and close the door on them!

 

[archangel04]

It is the double standard that had made me angry at those who are there to protect us. Some of these “shepherds” are just there to fill their retirement fund. How many have ever written a letter to certain Bishops only to never get a reply, at least to acknowledge that his office received it? It’s not always the Bishops fault, his close assistants (who happen to be lay people) are also to blame, some of them only let the Bishop see what they want him to see. It’s ok to feel anger and sadness at this situation, but one thing we forget as lay people is that we also must pray for them. Satan constantly is tempting those in the Church, and they need our prayers.
I remember I got called in because at the confirmation class I thought last year I brought in the topics of hell, sin, and demons. I was told I should not bring up the subjects of hell or demons for the lessons because they won’t understand. The thing it that I only brought these topics up 2 weeks before classes were over, and everything I said is what the Catechism says.

 

[estesbob]

I am in RCIA and trying to understand the standards in the Catholic Church.

Members I have met in RCIA are great people and very passionate about their faith, theology, etc. I have been fortunate to meet people who love the Catholic Church and are very helpful. I am grateful for their patience.

The church has very strict standards for its members on contraception, abortion, marriage, sexuality, integrity, etc. There is no shortage of traditions, rituals, and guidelines.

When it comes to the leadership of the church, a different standard appears to apply than the standard that is preached. There have been very public scandals with priests and bishops. There is a cardinal that protests with criminals in favor of criminal behavior after shamelessly covering for priests who abused children. I have personally known a church official who would lie to anyone about anything at anytime.

The fact that these bad apples occur does not hinder me in my consideration of Catholicism. Any large organization will have members that disappoint. But the reaction of the leadership in these cases is mediocre and does not appear to be motivated by the same kind of fear and love of God that the church preaches to its members. I cannot picture the original apostles leaving a pedophile in charge of a day care center in an attempt at rehabilitation. If anything, the original apostles seemed to believe a high standard for leaders in the church was essential.

For those of you who are Catholic and have pondered this question, how do you deal with this double standard? How do you deal with a church that wants to tell you how to run your household, but can’t bring itself to remove a church official who undermines the church with criminal behavior? How do you listen to a sermon on the courage of the original apostles who died horrible deaths as a result of their faith, but the person delivering the sermon lacks the courage to fire criminals? What thought process do you use to feel respect for those too cowardly to protect the innocent and the image of the Church?

Do you think if you were not already Catholic, you would choose to enter the Church at this point in time? If you would, how would you reconcile the behavior of its leaders with its message?

When this all broke I had meetings with both my pastor and my Bishop and expressed my disgust. Both of them, by the way, shared my disgust. In the end as I pondered this I thought about the apostles. One betrayed Jesus ,one denied him three times, one doubted him , 11 fled leaving the apostle John the only one to be at the foot of the cross. To me holding our clergy to a higher standard than the apostles would be the double standard.

 

[challam2010]

Firstly, congratulations on your RCIA journey – I hope you enjoy the journey and that it’s fruitful for you and will result in you becoming part of our Catholic family.

You’re obviously not sleeping in your classes, and you pose a hard question that I’ve also considered at great length. (I’m a 1950’s cradle Catholic who has joyfully embraced all the reforms of Vat II – and wish the reforms had not been stymied the past 20+ years – which makes me walk on the left side of this very right-sided CAF community, so caveat emptor this post. I do consider myself to be a faithful Catholic and attend daily Mass - so maybe I’m not totally lost. )

Yes, we Catholics globally have been incredibly shocked, disappointed and betrayed in a most serious fashion by the criminal actions of sick men and the sinfully poor judgment of their superiors. Most of that has been acknowledged and addressed in the US, and extensive reforms put into place which will help safeguard against similar actions (on all parties’ part) in the future. Apologies have been made – most of them sincere, in my opinion. Europe, Britain, Mexico and South America still face ongoing revelations and the hard, painful work of reparation, but, again in my opinion, the Vatican seems to be more involved now and more committed to righting these horrible wrongs as much as they can be.

Because I’ve lived in fairly liberal dioceses most of my life (after my foundation in the very conservative pre-Vat II Church), and because I’ve had the opportunity to study with extremely holy (saintly) priests whose theological education and formation were completed post-VII, I don’t see the hierarchical church (the men who are in charge) as perfect in any sense. I do believe the Church as a whole is guided by the Spirit, but I don’t believe all the disciplines or conventions imposed by the curia are sacred from questioning.

Simply put – I think there is room for error in what the dudes in charge do and say, and especially the hierarchical, patriarchal, medieval institution they control. I also don’t think it’s “heresy” to question that in light of the realities of our daily lives. Frankly, the less I hear about Rome, et al, the better off my spiritual life is.

I learned after Vat II that I am an adult in all areas of my life – capable of discerning right from wrong according to my well-catechized and well-informed conscience. I will be judged by Jesus as He alone knows the circumstances and state of my life and my soul.

Which brings me to the crux of my faith, which is Jesus,.the Gospel, and most especially the Eucharist.

There have been many occasions I’ve felt – and still feel – that the Church falls far short of what it/we are called to be and to do – and I include myself in that. We are all sinners, including those who lead the Church. The leaders have the additional burden of temptation to abuse power, and I don’t think they always resist that temptation. But, as St. Peter said, “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life; and we have believed, and have come to know, that you are the Holy One of God.”

The Eucharist – the reality of the real Jesus present in my heart, my soul, my life – is what keeps me Catholic.

I am “in communion” with Rome in that I don’t violate any law that I’m aware of (not that I don’t sin and seek reconciliation) – but “the law” doesn’t rule my life. I hope that the love of Jesus does. I had my fill of the counter-reformation Church and its legalistic ways before 1965 and will not return to that way of thinking or acting. I don’t think it’s how Jesus asks us to live. I think anyone would be hard-pressed to show more than a couple of Gospel quotes where Jesus puts more emphasis on law than love.

I’m also not afraid to use my intellect and personal perspective and vision to SEE the ways the Church could be following the Gospel closer.

That’s probably way more of an answer than you wanted and I hope it addressed your questions without too much rambling. The short version is, I remain in the Church despite its flaws because it’s here that I find Jesus.

I wish you the best during your time of discernment. God bless you.

 

[texinmi]

When this all broke I had meetings with both my pastor and my Bishop and expressed my disgust. Both of them, by the way, shared my disgust. In the end as I pondered this I thought about the apostles. One betrayed Jesus ,one denied him three times, one doubted him , 11 fled leaving the apostle John the only one to be at the foot of the cross. To me holding our clergy to a higher standard than the apostles would be the double standard.

Your points have been offered to me at RCIA and by others so often they sound like church talking points. But these acts by the apostles were made prior to the resurrection. After seeing proof of his power over death they courageously put their lives at risk. Their doubts and questions also serve to offer us convincing proof of his identity in that they were all changed men after his victory on the cross. I believe all but one died horrific deaths and their sacrifice itself is evidence that Jesus is the Messiah. Who dies a horrible death to protect a lie or a false prophet?

To claim the disciples were flawed and similar to today’s church leaders one would have to claim that some of the disciples were pedophiles, others knew about their criminal acts and Jesus himself was silent as children were raped. I don’t know of any evidence to support such a comparison. Nor do I recall the apostles justifying crimes by citing the sins of others as justification as you have done here.

Quite the opposite, the more one benchmarks todays leaders against the original church, the more I see cowards versus courageous men who gave everything. Does joining the Catholic Church mean acceptance of its leadership regardless of its performance or lack thereof?

 

[estesbob]

Your points have been offered to me at RCIA and by others so often they sound like church talking points. But these acts by the apostles were made prior to the resurrection. After seeing proof of his power over death they courageously put their lives at risk. Their doubts and questions also serve to offer us convincing proof of his identity in that they were all changed men after his victory on the cross. I believe all but one died horrific deaths and their sacrifice itself is evidence that Jesus is the Messiah. Who dies a horrible death to protect a lie or a false prophet?

To claim the disciples were flawed and similar to today’s church leaders one would have to claim that some of the disciples were pedophiles, others knew about their criminal acts and Jesus himself was silent as children were raped. I don’t know of any evidence to support such a comparison. Nor do I recall the apostles justifying crimes by citing the sins of others as justification as you have done here.

Quite the opposite, the more one benchmarks todays leaders against the original church, the more I see cowards versus courageous men who gave everything. Does joining the Catholic Church mean acceptance of its leadership regardless of its performance or lack thereof?

Sounds like you are demaning perfection. If so you are not likely to find any faith community you are comfotable with. the Truth is as egregious as the homosexual priest scandal was there was less molestation than one finds by the clergy in other denominations. For instance we currently have a evangelical preacher being accused of homosexul rape of young men under his care-does that mean that people should walk away from all evangalical denominations?

I go back again to the Apostles. Jesus forgave them-why cant you forgive their sucessors?

 

[texinmi]

challam2010,

Thank you for your thoughtful answer.

 

[ingoodfaith]

I was baptized a Catholic after birth and have been practicing since.

I would say that there are bad apples in any organization, no matter where you go. This goes from work, home, …civilization. There is a battle between good and evil in this world, always has been.

How I deal with it: Do not judge, as that is not our place. You can only do the best you can and when you think you have reached that point God will push you further in your faith.

When reverence was removed from the churches and replaced with culture of the modern era a lot of changes occurred that allowed for bad things to happen (evil). Prayer is the most powerful answer to any situation.

Each of us has a place, a station in life, some will be defenders of the Church, while others will not have that drive but will be devout in every way they can.

Our Church leaders are only human and therefore subject to the temptations of satan and evil. Some give in while others do not even to the death ( Saints and Martyrs).

But seek ye first the kingdom of God and his justice, and all these things shall be added unto you. Luke 12:31

 

[FCEGM]

. . .
Quite the opposite, the more one benchmarks todays leaders against the original church, the more I see cowards versus courageous men who gave everything. Does joining the Catholic Church mean acceptance of its leadership regardless of its performance or lack thereof?

I’m reminded of a passage from Frank Sheed’s Theology for Beginners:

“It is the especial meaning of the Church that in it Our Lord unites men to Himself through humanity - not through some ideal humanity, but through the humanity, good, bad, and indifferent, that actually exists. As Matthew Arnold notes, where other religions suggest a special type of man, Catholics suggest ‘all the pell mell of the men and women of Shakespeare’s plays. There is a certain kind of spiritual man who finds all this intolerable. His every instinct is revolted at the thought of Christ’s working in and through, and of himself being sanctified in and through, this mixed crowd of human beings. The hot smell of humanity is too strong for him. He would have his own direct relation with God, excluding the turbulence of humanity; or he would make his own choice of the men he feels God would choose. But this is preciousness and folly. It is as though the man Christ healed by the touch of His spittle had asked to be healed some other way - he was a refined man, perhaps, brought up to regard spittle as vulgar, or even unhygienic. One cannot be thus delicate about the Gifts of God.’”

 

[dconklin]

To claim the disciples were flawed and similar to today’s church leaders one would have to claim that some of the disciples were pedophiles, others knew about their criminal acts and Jesus himself was silent as children were raped. I don’t know of any evidence to support such a comparison. Nor do I recall the apostles justifying crimes by citing the sins of others as justification as you have done here.

Wow! Jesus chose these men (the Apostles) despite their flaws. One was a hated tax collector. Jesus chooses (by way of calling them) priests despite their flaws. And not all the men he calls answer the call. If He wanted the Church to be run by perfect angels He would have sent Angels from Heaven. He could do that, you know. Back when Jesus chose the Apostles a pedophile would have been killed on the spot.

Oh, and the disciples chose Jesus. The Apostles were chosen. The disciples, like any Christian chose to be followers - though we are all called. They were all sinners as we are.

 

[Pregustator]

I am in RCIA and trying to understand the standards in the Catholic Church.

Members I have met in RCIA are great people and very passionate about their faith, theology, etc. I have been fortunate to meet people who love the Catholic Church and are very helpful. I am grateful for their patience.

The church has very strict standards for its members on contraception, abortion, marriage, sexuality, integrity, etc. There is no shortage of traditions, rituals, and guidelines.

When it comes to the leadership of the church, a different standard appears to apply than the standard that is preached. There have been very public scandals with priests and bishops. There is a cardinal that protests with criminals in favor of criminal behavior after shamelessly covering for priests who abused children. I have personally known a church official who would lie to anyone about anything at anytime.

The fact that these bad apples occur does not hinder me in my consideration of Catholicism. Any large organization will have members that disappoint. But the reaction of the leadership in these cases is mediocre and does not appear to be motivated by the same kind of fear and love of God that the church preaches to its members. I cannot picture the original apostles leaving a pedophile in charge of a day care center in an attempt at rehabilitation. If anything, the original apostles seemed to believe a high standard for leaders in the church was essential.

For those of you who are Catholic and have pondered this question, how do you deal with this double standard? How do you deal with a church that wants to tell you how to run your household, but can’t bring itself to remove a church official who undermines the church with criminal behavior? How do you listen to a sermon on the courage of the original apostles who died horrible deaths as a result of their faith, but the person delivering the sermon lacks the courage to fire criminals? What thought process do you use to feel respect for those too cowardly to protect the innocent and the image of the Church?

Do you think if you were not already Catholic, you would choose to enter the Church at this point in time? If you would, how would you reconcile the behavior of its leaders with its message?

As a believing Catholic, I have been more scandalized by the Church leadership’s insufficient responses to the abuse scandal than I have been by the abuse, itself. And, if you think about it, that says alot.

What has appalled me more that the inept handling of the scandal has been the defensive posture of the Vatican, blaming the media for their inadequacies. When Cardinal Sodano stood beside the Pope in St. Peter’s Square and delivered his harangue against the media for trying to smear the Pope, I shook my head in total shock, embarrassed, at that moment, to be a Catholic. How can a Catholic defend such a moment?

I began to realize that there is no obligation for an individual Catholic to defend the indefensible. The Church’s response has been dissatisfying, and as a Catholic, I remain unclear as to how to process it. On the one hand, I will not leave the Church, for I believe it to be the Body of Christ, and as the apostles said to Christ, in essence, “where else would we go?” On the other hand, I will not labor to make excuses for the Church’s appallingly weak response to this crisis. It’s their job to dig themselves out of their own hole, at this point. It isn’t mine. And it isn’t yours.

 

[wisdomseeker]

I am in RCIA and trying to understand the standards in the Catholic Church.

Members I have met in RCIA are great people and very passionate about their faith, theology, etc. I have been fortunate to meet people who love the Catholic Church and are very helpful. I am grateful for their patience.

The church has very strict standards for its members on contraception, abortion, marriage, sexuality, integrity, etc. There is no shortage of traditions, rituals, and guidelines.

When it comes to the leadership of the church, a different standard appears to apply than the standard that is preached. There have been very public scandals with priests and bishops. There is a cardinal that protests with criminals in favor of criminal behavior after shamelessly covering for priests who abused children. I have personally known a church official who would lie to anyone about anything at anytime.

The fact that these bad apples occur does not hinder me in my consideration of Catholicism. Any large organization will have members that disappoint. But the reaction of the leadership in these cases is mediocre and does not appear to be motivated by the same kind of fear and love of God that the church preaches to its members. I cannot picture the original apostles leaving a pedophile in charge of a day care center in an attempt at rehabilitation. If anything, the original apostles seemed to believe a high standard for leaders in the church was essential.

For those of you who are Catholic and have pondered this question, how do you deal with this double standard? How do you deal with a church that wants to tell you how to run your household, but can’t bring itself to remove a church official who undermines the church with criminal behavior? How do you listen to a sermon on the courage of the original apostles who died horrible deaths as a result of their faith, but the person delivering the sermon lacks the courage to fire criminals? What thought process do you use to feel respect for those too cowardly to protect the innocent and the image of the Church?

Do you think if you were not already Catholic, you would choose to enter the Church at this point in time? If you would, how would you reconcile the behavior of its leaders with its message?

My friend do not get discouraged by this. just remember when Jesus said to His disciples, do what they tell you but do not do as they do. at that time of Jesus the leaders of Israel were also corrupted. the Church is a suffering Church here on earth. each one of us will be held accountable for what we do. so, just do what you must do for our Lord and dont worry about what our leaders are doing right now. many of these bishops and priest were not tought the Faith appropriately and that is why we are going through a horrible time. if you can find a Parish Latin Mass go to them. they are the ones who can pass on the Faith with holiness.

for encouragment.

youtube.com/user/RealCatholicTV?feature=mhum#p/a/u/0/TwJIFJM93Sk

youtube.com/user/RealCatholicTV?feature=mhum#p/a/u/0/1WNkJ5Of5dU

 

[texinmi]

As a believing Catholic, I have been more scandalized by the Church leadership’s insufficient responses to the abuse scandal than I have been by the abuse, itself. And, if you think about it, that says alot.

What has appalled me more that the inept handling of the scandal has been the defensive posture of the Vatican, blaming the media for their inadequacies. When Cardinal Sodano stood beside the Pope in St. Peter’s Square and delivered his harangue against the media for trying to smear the Pope, I shook my head in total shock, embarrassed, at that moment, to be a Catholic. How can a Catholic defend such a moment?

I began to realize that there is no obligation for an individual Catholic to defend the indefensible. The Church’s response has been dissatisfying, and as a Catholic, I remain unclear as to how to process it. On the one hand, I will not leave the Church, for I believe it to be the Body of Christ, and as the apostles said to Christ, in essence, “where else would we go?” On the other hand, I will not labor to make excuses for the Church’s appallingly weak response to this crisis. It’s their job to dig themselves out of their own hole, at this point. It isn’t mine. And it isn’t yours.

Thank you for your answer. Does your dissatisfaction with the leadership alter your participation? Do you contribute as much of your time and money as you would if the leadership conducted itself in a manner that inspired?

 

[estesbob]

Thank you for your answer. Does your dissatisfaction with the leadership alter your participation? Do you contribute as much of your time and money as you would if the leadership conducted itself in a manner that inspired?

I give them more of my time and money. Times of trouble is not the time for true believers to walk away. There is absolutely nothing the men who are leaders in this church can do to turn me away from the one true faith. Nothing

 

[archangel04]

I give them more of my time and money. Times of trouble is not the time for true believers to walk away. There is absolutely nothing the men who are leaders in this church can do to turn me away from the one true faith. Nothing

Totally agree with that statement. This is where True Catholics are tested, and these times we have been tested hard, not only with the abuse scandals, but also with Bishops who do not publicly oppose pro-abortion politicians, or worse those that come out in public and state that they will not deny Holy Communion to them. Also, the “spirit of Vatican 2” did much to shake them way many people believed. The suppose scandal that collection money was going to pro-abortion and gay organizations. These things have shaken the foundation of the Church, but it’s also a sign from God, that no matter how hard His Church is hit, she remains standing and grounded on the foundation of the Apostles, Church Fathers, martyrs, and saints.

Is it just me or did I miss the public formal apology from US Bishops to the victims and the rest who were hurt for their lack of responsibility? I know the Many European Bishops came out with an apology, and some resigned as well.

 

[estesbob]

Totally agree with that statement. This is where True Catholics are tested, and these times we have been tested hard, not only with the abuse scandals, but also with Bishops who do not publicly oppose pro-abortion politicians, or worse those that come out in public and state that they will not deny Holy Communion to them. Also, the “spirit of Vatican 2” did much to shake them way many people believed. The suppose scandal that collection money was going to pro-abortion and gay organizations. These things have shaken the foundation of the Church, but it’s also a sign from God, that no matter how hard His Church is hit, she remains standing and grounded on the foundation of the Apostles, Church Fathers, martyrs, and saints.

Is it just me or did I miss the public formal apology from US Bishops to the victims and the rest who were hurt for their lack of responsibility? I know the Many European Bishops came out with an apology, and some resigned as well.

We also have to keep in mind that over 98% of the clergy were true to the faith and conducted themselves appropriately. I look upon this as an action by Satan to undermine the Church. At least in my case he is not going to have the satisfaction of running me off.