Saudi Arabia: Unlikely Champion of Interfaith Dialogue

King Abdullah bin Abdulaziz of Saudi Arabia plans to open an “interreligious and intercultural dialogue center” in Vienna, Austria, it was reported this past week. The plan immediately met with a cool response from some prominent Jews and Catholics, whose respective faiths are virtually outlawed in the kingdom:

Responding to criticism from a reporter from a Jewish newspaper about a lack of synagogues in the Arab kingdom, Prince Saud said there was no need for them because “there are no Jewish people in Saudi Arabia”. But he later said that the Jewish faith would be represented fairly at the Vienna project. The centre has no fixed opening date.

Cardinal Jean-Louis Tauran, head of the Vatican’s department for interfaith dialogue, welcomed the plan but said Saudi Arabia must tackle its own curbs on religious freedom. “These problems exist and they must be resolved. We are not naive,” he told official Austrian Catholic agency Kathpress in an interview, adding that faith and politics must not mix at the Vienna centre. The Holy See may seek observer status.

Money for the project will come partially from the governments of Austria and Spain, although the majority of the funding is expected to come from the Saudis. At this point, it is unclear whether the project will gain the cachet and credibility it aspires to.

This is not the first time the Saudi government has attempted to cast itself as a vanguard for religious dialogue. In 2006, the kingdom awarded $20 million grants to Harvard and Georgetown Universities for similar initiatives (the ideological bent of these organizations has since been cross-examined by public figures). And in 2008, the king spearheaded an “Interfaith Dialogue Conference” in Madrid, Spain.

Authentic interreligious understanding should be a high priority for thoughtful people of any faith, but it is in the name of such authenticity that the the value of ‘dialogue’ sometimes ought to be questioned—especially when that word becomes a thin veneer for glossing over significant and deep disagreements among people of different faiths. In this case, it seems the moniker is being used even more loosely than it is by some well-intentioned domestic activists. It would almost take an act of willful refusal to look past both the Saudi government’s own internal policies and their history of transparent public relations stunts. If the Saudi government feels it must adhere to an absolutist interpretation of Islamic law within its own territory, that is one issue. But for that same government to then proclaim its commitment to ecumenism and tolerance on the world stage seems a staggering and bizarre hypocrisy.

It will be telling to see whether this center, if it gets off the ground, will draw participation from the Vatican, a possibility that Cardinal Tauran refuses to rule out entirely. Yet when it comes to religious dialogue, one would imagine that a crucial precondition of any meaningful engagement is sincerity.