
Gay Archbishop's Appointment Criticized by Christian Group
Christian Concern's Chief Executive, Andrea Williams, said Vann "is publicly living in deliberate rejection" of church doctrine because "she lives with her civil partner, Wendy, in a same-sex relationship."
The group's Head of Public Policy, Tim Dieppe, told Newsweek Vann is "openly defying the doctrine she has taken a vow to."
The Church in Wales, which has praised Vann's "rich diocesan experience and deep commitment to reconciliation" declined to respond to the criticism.
The appointment of an openly gay leader to a major Anglican post has ignited a cultural and theological flashpoint within global Christianity, with the Church in Wales positioning itself as a more inclusive body compared to other Anglican provinces.
In the United States, similar shifts have played out. The Episcopal Church elected Gene Robinson in 2003 as the first openly gay bishop, leading to lasting tensions with the broader Anglican Communion. More recently, openly LGBTQ+ clergy continue to serve in several U.S. dioceses, including Bishop Bonnie Perry of Michigan.
Williams said: Cherry Vann lives with her civil partner, Wendy, in a same-sex relationship. This directly contradicts the Church's historic and biblical doctrine that marriage is the lifelong union of one man and one woman, and that sexual relationships are reserved for marriage.
"As an ordained minister, and now Archbishop, Cherry Vann has sworn to uphold the teaching of the Church. Instead, she is publicly living in deliberate rejection of those very doctrines."
Christian Concern is a U.K-based conservative evangelical advocacy organization, known for supporting high-profile Christian freedom legal cases.
Cherry Vann was elected Archbishop of Wales on Wednesday, after securing support from two-thirds of an electoral college composed of clergy and lay representatives, according to British newspaper The Guardian. She is also the first LGBTQ+ person to hold the title in Wales.
Her civil partnership is permitted under current Church in Wales rules, which allow clergy to enter same-sex civil unions. While same-sex weddings are not currently performed in the church, a 2021 vote by its governing body authorized blessings for same-sex civil partnerships-a change supported unanimously by the bishops and passed by majorities in the clergy and laity, according to BBC News.
Under church law, clergy may opt out of conducting such blessings, but their availability is seen as a meaningful theological endorsement. "The Church in Wales has done the right thing under God for the LGBTQIA+ community," said Bishop Gregory Cameron, who introduced the 2021 bill.
Dieppe said that this amounted to a change in practice not doctrine meaning that, while he still this is a "contradictory position" for the church, Vann's appointment "is still against doctrine."
"She doesn't believe her own church's teachings," Dieppe told Newsweek. "Lots of people are out there thinking this is absurd."
Vann was elected to succeed Archbishop Andy John, who stepped down in June amid growing scrutiny of his leadership after two reports uncovered a culture of excessive drinking, bullying, and sexual misconduct at Bangor Cathedral. There was no suggestion the former archbishop had behaved inappropriately.
Though no allegations were made directly against John, he issued an "unreserved and unequivocal" apology, saying he accepted full responsibility for the church's failures under his leadership.
Vann herself is a patron of the Open Table Network, an ecumenical Christian community for LGBTQ+ people and allies.
She has spoken out against opposition to her role in the church before, telling local outlet Nation.Cymru: "There were a lot of unkind and unpleasant things said on both sides until the day where the General Synod eventually decided that this was the way the church should go."
"I remember being told myself that I couldn't possibly have a call to the priesthood because the church didn't allow it, as if that was a watertight argument," she said. "I think when you have that sense of call, it doesn't go away and it won't go away and we were left waiting."
She went on to speak about how she hid being gay for a long time.
"I have to confess that I hid it for a long, long time as a lot of gay clergy do, and as a lot of people sitting in the pews do," she said. "I hid it out of fear. It was a very fearful place to be, and it felt also quite disingenuous."
She added: "I believe that by simply being here as an out gay person with a partner, and my partner is accompanying me on some of my visits, and we've had nothing but welcome from everybody, I believe that is probably doing as much, if not more, than I would achieve if I were to be an open campaigner on the subject."
When Newsweek contacted the Church in Wales for a response to this criticism, it declined to comment.
But it went on to highlight some of the welcome Cherry had recieved, including from the Cytun, the ecumenical Christian body for Wales, which is made up of the Baptist Union of Wales, the Congregational Federation of Wales, the Union of Welsh Independents, the Presbyterian Church of Wales, the Methodist Church in Wales, the Salvation Army, the Religious Society of Friends (Quakers), the Roman Catholic Church, and the United Reformed Church.
It said: "With her rich diocesan experience and deep commitment to reconciliation let us uphold Archbishop-elect Cherry in prayer as she prepares to take up this historic ministry. May she be sustained by God's wisdom, compassion, and grace at this pivotal moment for the Church in Wales."
Christian Concern's Chief Executive, Andrea Williams said: "That she was elected with a two-thirds majority of the Electoral College demonstrates that the Church in Wales has now institutionally turned away from biblical teaching on sexual morality.
"What is a church if it refuses to uphold the doctrines it professes to believe? What does the Church in Wales actually stand for, if not the gospel handed down through the centuries? This appointment marks a tragic moment, evidence that the Church in Wales is in open rebellion against God's Word. It is a clear sign of apostasy.
"No Bible-believing Christian can remain under the spiritual leadership of someone who so publicly rejects the clear teaching of Scripture. God will judge His Church for abandoning the gospel. As James reminds us, those who teach will be judged more strictly (James 3:1).
Following her election, Vann said: "I work to bring healing and reconciliation, and to build a really good level of trust across the church and the communities the church serves."
The Very Revd Ian Black, Dean of Newport said on behalf of the Diocese of Monmouth, where Vann has been a bishop for five years: "Cherry is the right person for this moment in the Church in Wales' life. She has the skills and vision that we need to restore trust following some very public failings. She has brought stability to the Diocese of Monmouth, managing the change to ministry areas with clarity and purpose, showing deep care for the clergy and people. This foundation will be a good base as she leads the Province over the next few years. She has a deep faith, which is also open to those who take a different view to her, and this has impressed those people enormously."
He added: "She has the skills and vision that we need to restore trust following some very public failings.
"She has a deep faith, which is also open to those who take a different view to her, and this has impressed those people enormously."
The Church in Wales is expected to revisit its policy on same-sex blessings by next year, with a possible vote on allowing full same-sex marriage as early as next spring. Vann's leadership could prove pivotal in shaping that debate.
Related Articles
Countries Testing a Universal Basic Income in 2025How to Watch France vs Wales: Live Stream UEFA Women's Euro, TV ChannelHow to Watch Wales vs Netherlands: Live Stream UEFA Women's Euro 2025, TV ChannelHow to Watch Belgium vs. Wales: Live Stream FIFA World Cup Qualifiers, TV Channel
2025 NEWSWEEK DIGITAL LLC.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Business Insider
42 minutes ago
- Business Insider
British Minister Badenoch's ‘Not Nigerian' remark sparks widespread backlash
A recent statement by British Business and Trade Secretary Kemi Badenoch declaring that she no longer considers herself Nigerian has drawn sharp criticism from both the Nigerian diaspora and political figures. Kemi Badenoch stated she no longer considers herself Nigerian, expressing full identification with the UK. Her comments sparked criticism from the Nigerian diaspora and political figures, highlighting the sensitivity of national identity. The debate raises broader issues about diaspora identity, cultural heritage, and perceptions of national belonging. Speaking on the Rosebud Podcast with Gyles Brandreth, Badenoch revealed that she hasn't renewed her Nigerian passport in over 20 years and now fully identifies with the United Kingdom, where she lives with her family. 'I'm Nigerian through ancestry, by birth, despite not being born there because of my parents, but by identity I'm not really, ' she said, adding that, 'I know the country very well, I have a lot of family there, and I am very interested in what happens there.' The comment struck a nerve in Nigeria, where national identity and diaspora pride remain deeply significant especially when expressed by someone of Nigerian heritage in such a prominent international role. As a beneficiary of automatic British citizenship by birth, Badenoch noted that she was one of the last individuals to receive this privilege before the policy was scrapped in 1981. For her, discovering her British citizenship was a game-changer. ' Home is where my now family is, and my now family is my children, it's my husband and my brother and his children, in-laws ' she emphasized, also considering the British Conservative party as an integral part of her extended family. Kemi Badenoch highlighted that her decision to relocate to the UK as a teenager was driven by her parents' concerns about Nigeria's unstable political and economic climate. "I think the reason I came back here was actually a very sad one, and it was that my parents thought: 'There's no future for you in this country,'" she said. Her remarks, including past claims about difficulty transmitting Nigerian citizenship to her children, have reignited debate over national identity, diaspora disconnection, and the cultural politics of belonging. Former Senator Shehu Sani Leads Political Firestorm The backlash to Kemi Badenoch's remarks intensified as prominent Nigerian voices, including former Senator Shehu Sani, publicly condemned her comments. 'If she has rejected Nigeria, she should at least return our name, ' Sani wrote on social media, referring to her Yoruba first name, Kemi. He questioned why Badenoch, who claimed she cannot transmit Nigerian citizenship to her children, would seek rights from a country she has disavowed. Badenoch made the citizenship claim during an earlier CNN interview, remarks that have since been widely countered. Sani responded sharply: ' Why should Kemi Badenoch be bothered about getting Nigerian citizenship for her offspring from a country she rebuked and rejected? She should just enjoy her adopted home and leave us alone in our father's home. ' In further posts, he accused Badenoch of projecting disdain for her heritage while benefiting from its cultural visibility. He also countered her claim about citizenship, noting that Nigeria's constitution does not bar women from passing on nationality to their children. He doubled down in subsequent posts, accusing Badenoch of projecting disdain for her heritage while benefitting from its visibility. ' Enjoy your adopted home and leave Nigeria alone, ' he wrote, reflecting frustration over her repeated efforts to distance herself from the country of her ancestry. Sani also challenged her claim about citizenship, noting that Nigeria's constitution does not discriminate against women in passing on nationality. You're right to question that phrasing. Since your original sentence is in the past tense, the refined version should maintain that. Here's the corrected version, keeping your tense and structure: Presidential aide, Dada Olusegun, also criticised the United Kingdom's Conservative Party leader, Kemi Badenoch, over her comments on Nigerian citizenship. Reacting to the claim in a post via his X handle, Olusegun accused Badenoch of deliberately misrepresenting Nigeria's laws. ' Aunty @KemiBadenoch, why do you continue to lie against your motherland? Why this continuous, dangerous, and desperate attempt to malign Nigeria? ' he wrote. He added: 'Chapter 3, Section 25(1)(c) of the 1999 Nigerian Constitution states that if the Nigerian woman is a citizen by birth, her children, whether born in Nigeria or abroad, are Nigerian citizens by descent, automatically under Section 25 of the Constitution. 'This holds regardless of the father's nationality. You do not need to apply for registration or naturalisation for her child to be a citizen. ' Legal Pushback Prominent human rights lawyer Femi Falana (SAN) echoed this constitutional clarification. According to Section 25 of Nigeria's 1999 Constitution, a child born to either a Nigerian father or mother is entitled to citizenship by birth. ' Badenoch's claim that her children can't obtain Nigerian citizenship because she's a woman is legally incorrect and misleading,' Falana said in a televised interview. He argued that such a statement reflects ignorance of Nigerian law and risks misinforming the public, especially those in the diaspora. A Divisive Pattern This is not the first time Badenoch has come under fire for comments on race, identity, or heritage. Her positions on issues ranging from colonialism to Black Lives Matter have frequently drawn criticism for catering to right-wing audiences. Her latest remarks have only deepened the divide. As diaspora voices grow louder and Nigerian officials demand greater respect from their global descendants, Badenoch faces increasing scrutiny, not only over what she said, but why she felt the need to say it at all.


New York Post
an hour ago
- New York Post
Arab nations are getting wise to Hamas — even as others foolishly squeeze Israel
Most media ignored last week's most important Middle East development: Arab nations for the first time publicly slammed Hamas' Oct. 7, 2023, massacre and demanded the terrorists surrender power, disarm, and release their hostages. OK, it's a low bar. But it's progress, and a lot more meaningful than British Prime Minister Keir Starmer's threat to recognize a Palestinian state or the other maneuvering over Gaza's food crisis. The landmark demands came in a seven-page declaration Tuesday by 17 countries, plus the European Union and the entire 22-member Arab League, including Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Qatar. Advertisement British Foreign Secretary David Lammy embraces Palestinian Prime Minister Mohammad Mustafa after Lammy spoke at a United Nations conference on July 29, 2025. AFP via Getty Images They reflect a willingness — finally! — to publicly acknowledge that Hamas' ouster is necessary to end the war in Gaza and thus ease the suffering of its civilians. Hallelujah: We've stressed since Day 1 that the conflict can't end with Hamas in power; the group, after all, openly vows to keep attacking the Jewish state until Israel is destroyed. Advertisement Perhaps the Gaza food shortages got the Arabs' attention — even if most reports misled readers by tacitly (or even openly) blaming Jerusalem for them. Bigger picture: Nations like Saudi Arabia and Qatar, egged on by President Donald Trump, are now eager to normalize relations with Israel, though they want the Gaza fighting to end first. Sadly, other parts of Tuesday's statement are as misguided as ever, calling for Hamas to 'hand over its weapons to the Palestinian Authority, with international engagement and support, in line with the objective of a sovereign and independent Palestinian State.' Advertisement With Gaza then seeing 'the deployment of a temporary international stabilization mission upon invitation by the Palestinian Authority and under the aegis of the United Nations.' The Palestinian Authority? The United Nations? Neither is fit for real responsibilities: The PA is nothing but an autocratic kleptocracy that uses international-aid funds to enrich its leaders and to pay terrorists to kill Israelis; even clueless President Joe Biden insisted it would have to be 'revitalized' before it could play any role in Gaza. UN peacekeepers, meanwhile, have never managed to keep peace anywhere in the Middle East; instead, the world body's presence — e.g., via groups like the UN Relief and Works Agency — has only fueled violence in the region. Advertisement Even more brainless is Starmer's threat to recognize a Palestinian state, along with France and Canada's plans to do so next month, 'unless the Israeli government takes substantive steps to end the appalling situation in Gaza, agree to a cease-fire and commit to a long-term, sustainable peace, reviving the prospect of a two-state solution.' Why no threats to Hamas if it keeps preventing food from reaching ordinary Gazans? How about insisting that it hand over its remaining Israeli hostages? Look: Israel has already taken 'substantive steps' to aid Gaza's civilians, and has already agreed to numerous cease-fire plans. Hamas rejects any cease-fire unless Israel agrees to let it keep power in Gaza, even as the terrorists block the peaceful distribution of food aid. It also refuses to release the remaining hostages, knowing that if it did, it would be its last act before total annihilation. As for a 'two-state solution,' Israelis backed it (until Oct. 7, anyway); the problem is finding Palestinian leadership to agree to a deal that doesn't put Israel's future at risk. So why is Starmer threatening Israel? Advertisement Oh, and here's a reality check: The outside world can't actually summon a state into existence; citizens of a would-be nation must create it on their own. Fact is, neither Britain, France, nor any other country can truly claim to care about Gazans unless they focus solely on the heart of the problem: Hamas. That Arab nations are at last starting to admit that it is the most hopeful sign yet for peace.


The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
Boris Johnson blasts Starmer for backing Palestinian state: ‘Ridiculous'
Former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson on Friday slammed the current UK leader for threatening to recognize Palestinian statehood amid the ongoing war in Gaza, calling the move 'ridiculous.' Johnson signaled Prime Minister Keir Starmer's commitment — largely following France's lead — was aimed toward capturing voters' attention, not promoting a ceasefire. 'It's nothing to do with promoting peace in the Middle East. Is nothing to do with advancing a two-state solution,' the former leader of the UK's Conservative Party said in an appearance on NewsNation's ' On Balance.' 'It's everything to do with the continual oscillation of the Labor prime minister between his own two states, a state of paralyzed inaction and a state of panic about what's going on in the Labor Party,' he told host Leland Vittert. Johnson continued, 'The problem in the Labor Party, the governing party in our country, is that they're terrified of losing the votes of the Muslim community. It's nothing to do with helping the Palestinians. It's about managing his own party.' The former leader, who resigned from his role in 2022 amid a scandal during the COVID-19 pandemic and following the U.K.'s withdrawal from the European Union in 2020, criticized broader efforts to recognize Palestine as a sovereign state. 'You're not supposed to recognize a state unless it has clearly defined boundaries, plainly the state of Palestine does not. And it [must] have a government [that] is capable of controlling those borders and part of the government of the putative state of Palestine is the psychotic Islamic fascist terrorist group Hamas,' Johnson said. He also described Palestinian statehood as a 'big reward' for little accomplishment. More calls for a two-state solution have cropped up in recent weeks, as humanitarian conditions in the Gaza Strip remain dire. The United Nations and other groups have pointed to reports of mass starvation and the blocking of aid into the region as cause for concern. The Israeli government has denied such claims and said Hamas is promoting a deadly rhetoric to shame leaders. But Starmer and other nations have flocked to the frontlines, promising aid through air drops and medical treatments for the vulnerable as violence in the region continues nearly two years after Hamas's initial Oct. 7, 2023, attack. Democratic lawmakers, including House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (N.Y.) and Rep. Ro Khanna (Calif.), have pressed the Trump administration to follow in the footsteps of the UK and France — as peace talks have stalled. The U.S. has not agreed to recognize Palestine as a state and Secretary of State Marco Rubio has pushed back on such calls. The administration has also significantly reduced assistance efforts in the Middle East, including the closure of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and withdrawal from the United Nations Food Program.