I have resumed a periodic column with Evangelicals Now. The current edition carries the most recent article. I reproduce it unedited and in full here.
Just over a week ago (at the time of writing), my friend uploaded a screen grab of her less than impressed response to a request from what those of us in Oldham would refer to as a “cheeky beggar”. What followed was over a week-long saga in which my friend’s response, dripping with sarcasm as it was, found its way into the national news. Every day, I saw a new outlet had picked up the story. It hit all the major national newspapers and media groups, making it a matter of true import when it finally hit the big stage in the Oldham Times. The saga – which as I write is still ongoing – was even dubbed #cakegate and, if I’m being honest, I am partly only mentioning it in these pages so Evangelicals Now doesn’t miss out on the bandwagon.
For those of you who missed this story, the salient facts are these. A PR company approached a local bakery asking if they would be willing to produce one big cake, a slightly smaller cake and 100 cupcakes on behalf of their unnamed celebrity client. In return for supplying these products, “payment would be made in the form of promotion on their socials with over 700k followers, as well as promoted in OK magazine.” After outlining the full request, the email signed off “Let me know your thoughts.”
My friend duly replied:
I’m so sorry to hear your client has fallen on such hard times they can’t afford to pay small businesses for their products.
Unfortunately as my mortgage provider doesn’t take payment “in the form of promotion on their socials”, and my staff can’t feed their kids with exposure on Instagram, I’ll have to decline your very generous offer.
Those are my thoughts.
If you google #cakegate, you will no doubt find the full request and complete response.
The unnamed celebrity has since been named and even responded in an ill-advised video. The public response has not been very supportive of the celebrity, to say the least. If I could sum up the mood, “cheeky beggar” is about the best I can do. It has been almost universally accepted (there are always one or two outliers) that small businesses ought to be paid properly and celebrities – who are among the best placed of all to pay – really ought to be doing so and not seeking to take advantage.
Of course, I’m not really writing this to plug my friend’s business. After all, she clearly isn’t interested in promotion on any of our socials. But I think the almost unanimous public response supporting my friend’s stance and lambasting the celebrity for refusing to pay up tells us something of which Christians should take note. Specifically, nobody takes kindly to people expecting professional work, skills and products to be given to them at a loss for essentially nothing.
Why do I say Christians need to take note? Because C-list celebrities are not the only cheeky beggars. Amongst the very worst offenders are believers. Christians, who not only expect something for nothing, but demand it in the name of the kingdom. In effect, they argue, if you really love the Lord, you’d give me this, or do this, for free.
This is not an issue on which scripture is silent. Paul explicitly tells Timothy, ‘The elders who are good leaders are to be considered worthy of double honour, especially those who work hard at preaching and teaching. For the Scripture says: Do not muzzle an ox while it is treading out the grain, and, “The worker is worthy of his wages.” (1 Tim 5:17-18). Yet repeatedly, it is full-time church elders who are asked, “what’s the least you need to live on?” as if the answer to that will in any way fulfil what the scriptures say. I have seen the same issue raised when it comes to Christian work in general. We frequently do not want to pay the “going rate” for workers, but expect people to scrape by for the sake of Christ when we wouldn’t dream of working for such meagre pay nor do people work harder for you when you don’t value them or care for their needs. But even outside of Christian ministry, we just expect freebies all the time. “It’s for the gospel” is assumed to be the magic word to get stuff for free. But how are we serving the cause of the gospel by going so clearly against what the scriptures say? “The worker is worthy of his wages” cannot possibly mean “unless it is for the gospel, at which point he isn’t!”
In an altogether different setting, Paul talks about a kind of “immorality that is not even tolerated among the pagans” (cf. 1 Cor 5:1). If #cakegate shows us anything, it’s that this sort of entitled behaviour and refusal to give people their due – whether we are claiming it is “for the gospel” or not – is not even tolerated within the world. How can we claim it is “for the gospel” when it is a matter of sin expressly noted in scripture and not tolerated amongst unbelievers? In the name of “good stewardship” many Christians are, to put it bluntly, just tightfisted. Need I mention the reputation – whispered but well known – of Christians in Keswick over the summer and their approach to buying anything and tipping staff? Even the world buys stuff to sit in cafes and tip in restaurants. The radical generosity of Christ is hidden by an approach to stewardship that is both unseen by the world and evidenced in little more than tightfistedness. We simultaneously end up sinning by not paying workers their due and demanding freebies “for the gospel”. These things are not even tolerated in the world!
When Christian culture has more in common with the entitled attitude of a now widely criticised celebrity, and flies in the face of what scripture states in black and white, we surely need to take a little look at ourselves, don’t we? Perhaps we need to rethink our understanding of Christian stewardship and reacquaint ourselves with the radical generosity of Christ. After all, nobody like a cheeky beggar.
I love the irony that the small business that didn’t want to be taken advantage of ended up with even more social media exposure than what was originally offered.
I was disappointed to read, if I got this right, that in Keswick Christians have a reputation of being poor tippers!
Re: #cakegate I guess this largely comes down to whether you think an intangible service such as publicity in exchange for the tangible goods such as cake is “something” for “nothing”. Given the comparable amounts you have to pay for them both it would appear that the marketplace would consider advertsing is even more valuable than cake!
Re: Christian “cheeky beggars”: Is it really unreasonable for a voluntary organisation to ask of it’s volunteers to give of their times and talents volunatarily? If the metaphor of a family applies to the church then freebies or mates-rates aren’t unreasonable requests to make of your fellow family members are they – especially in furtherance of the family business?
When does generosity become profligate? When does stewardship become stinginess? When does asking favours become taking liberties? You’ll always be accussed of one or the other! In my experience the Church walks the tightrope pretty well.
There is a well established free-loader system in which “influencers” and celebrities seek freebies in exchange for “promotion” of questionable value. The reality is, this was recently an issue in the UK national press and the uniform view was that this was indeed an unacceptable offer and was rightly rebuffed. It was very much viewed as a something for nothing attempt to gain freebies at the expense of a worker. Almost nobody thought it legitimate.
As for the church, clearly I am not talking about members serving in their own church. And, of course, if they want to offer to use their professional skills for free, I think that is entirely legitimate if they want to do so. But the situation is more frequently churches expecting such things for nothing and nigh on demanding that people should do work, at great expense, for free. They simultaneously want their pastors and staff to work for less than generous wages. They expect it “for the gospel”. This seems to be precisely the situation Paul is addressing when he insists the Apostles are entitled to monetary recompense and support. He chooses not to take it (which he is free to offer) but the church ought not to demand it when they ought to be generously offering to support people and pay them for their work.
In my experience, the church in the UK does not walk your tightrope well at all. I think “stewardship” has won the day and it is often an excuse for stinginess. Again, there are wonderful examples of individuals, churches and organisations who are not at all like that and are brilliant examples of generosity. I am grateful my own church have never been anything other than generous, not only to me, but as a general view. Ours is not the only one. But as a culture – which mirrors the middle class culture most of UK evangelicalism is drawn from – the UK church is (like majority uk culture tbh) tight fisted and dresses it up as an act of stewardship.
Hmmm, I’m not sure this article is as insightful as it might appear, and is based more on caricature.
My anecdotal experience is that the church is no more and no less “guilty” of operating in the barter economy than any other small enterprise. It is especially difficult in the charitable sector as we have a responsibility to steward wisely the donations people make. I think you’ll find the the opposite complaint (“that’s not what we give our money for” etc) is far more prevelant than (“you’re not generous enough with our donations”). I’ve also been on a Christian grant making body, and was always amazed by the amount many Christian organisations wanted for IT equipment (why did they always need Apple Macs?!!). Maybe it’s because they feel guilty spending the collection plate giving on these items?
The whole “favours/barter economy” is both well known and established. A C-celebrity bartering with a C-business in a goods-for-publicity arrangement is hardly big news, and your friends response seemed churlish and uncharitable to myself and others I have discussed it with. Let those who have never asked for “mates rates” throw the first stone.
I didn’t say the church was more or less like anyone else. I did point out that (in the UK) this was not at all well received or supported in the world. It hit the papers and the almost unanimous response was something for nothing is not acceptable. I the said the Bible has something to say about that and it is a known issue in the UK church.
Are there outliers, yes of course, as there always are. But is it a pervasive issue in the church, I think so.
Hmmm, I’m not sure this article is as insightful as it might appear, and is based more on caricature.
My anecdotal experience is that the church is no more and no less “guilty” of operating in the barter economy than any other small enterprise. It is especially difficult in the charitable sector as we have a responsibility to steward wisely the donations people make. I think you’ll find the the opposite complaint (“that’s not what we give our money for” etc) is far more prevelant than (“you’re not generous enough with our donations”). I’ve also been on a Christian grant making body, and was always amazed by the amount many Christian organisations wanted for IT equipment (why did they always need Apple Macs?!!). Maybe it’s because they feel guilty spending the collection plate giving on these items?
The whole “favours/barter economy” is both well known and established. A C-celebrity bartering with a C-business cake business in a goods-for-publicity arrangement is hardly big news, and your friends response seemed churlish and uncharitable to myself and others I have discussed it with. Let those who have never asked for “mates rates” throw the first stone.
I know it’s not the point of the blog (so why include it, especially if it’s anecdotal?) but the “Christians in Keswick” jibe is hurtful. We ran houseparties at Convention time for decades and, if our groups were anything like representative, their spending in the town must have caused a spike in the income of local businesses. There was certainly no hesitation in contributing to a healthy tip whenever we dined out as a group. I’m not connected to the Convention but there has been for some years now a concerted effort to promote good relations between conventioneers and townspeople and relations have improved. Lastly, and admittedly a minor point, it wasn’t unheard of for one ice-cream parlour to increase prices specifically for convention weeks. I’m sorry for whining as I do find your blog helpful.
I mentioned it because it is quite well known, many of the business continue to say it is so and it is indicative of the point that I do think Christians are (often) tight fisted.
There was a Keswick Facebook group, on which many local businesses had a presence, and these specific noises were made with regularity by the business community. I don’t think the reputation is necessarily Keswick convention’s fault – as if they tell all their people not to spend money – I think the fault lies with the culture of wider evangelicalism that is (and was the point of my article) often stingy. The point wasn’t that the convention encourage such things, but that many of the Christians who go have such a reputation and, in my wider experience, it is not altogether unwarranted.
I don’t doubt there are those who buck that and who operate differently. But it is a widespread problem and the particular example is one that is widely known. That is why I included it.