Vatican-Saudi talks on churches

[Uthman]

The Vatican is holding talks with Saudi Arabia on building the first church in the kingdom, where some 1.5m Christians are not allowed to worship publicly.

Archbishop Paul-Mounged el-Hachem, one of Pope Benedict XVI's most senior Middle East representatives, said the discussions had begun a few weeks ago.

But the archbishop cautioned that the Vatican could not predict the outcome.

The discussions come in the wake of King Abdullah's historic meeting with the Pope at the Vatican last November.

A Catholic-Muslim Forum was also set up by the Pope two weeks ago to repair relations between the two faiths after the crisis caused by a speech he gave in Germany in 2006, in which he appeared to associate Islam with violence.

'Reciprocity'

The disclosure of talks between the Vatican and Saudi Arabia, which do not have diplomatic ties, came soon after the first Roman Catholic church in the Qatari capital, Doha, was opened in a service attended by 15,000 people.
Archbishop Hachem, the Apostolic Nuncio to Kuwait, Qatar, Yemen, Bahrain and the UAE, who attended the inauguration, said he hoped there would soon be a similar church for the many Christians in neighbouring Saudi Arabia.

If we manage to obtain authorisation for the construction of the first church, it will be an outcome of historic dimensions

Father Federico Lombardi
Spokesman for Pope Benedict

"Discussions are under way to allow the construction of churches in the kingdom," he said.

Although he made clear the outcome was uncertain, the archbishop added that a church in Saudi Arabia would be an important sign of "reciprocity" between Muslims and Christians.

The Vatican has noted that Muslims are free to worship openly in Europe and demands religious freedom as a condition for the opening of diplomatic relations.

About a million Catholics, many of them migrant workers from the Philippines, live in Saudi Arabia.

They are allowed to worship in private, mostly in people's homes, but worship in public places and outward signs of faith, such as crucifixes, are forbidden.

The last Christian priest was expelled from the kingdom in 1985.

Christians complain that rules are not clear and that the Saudi religious authorities, who enforce the kingdom's conservative brand of Islam, *******sm, sometimes crack down on legitimate congregations.

The authorities cite a tradition of the Prophet Muhammad that only Islam can be practised in the Arabian Peninsula.

A spokesman for Pope Benedict, Father Federico Lombardi, said: "If we manage to obtain authorisation for the construction of the first church, it will be an outcome of historic dimensions."

Source

[Amadeus85]

What is the opinion of muslim members of LI about building the first church in Saudi Arabia?

[aamirsaab]

:sl:
I have no problem with them building a church. It's a little odd at first, given that suadi is known for being a muslim country (albeit a weird one) but it's absolutely fine by me.

Build a church, build a synagoge, build a tree - it's all good for the sake of humanity.

Cool, that rhymed!

[Uthman]

For me, it's a difficult one really. In a true Islamic state (which I admit, Saudi is not), practise of religions other than Islam is not to be done openly.

One might argue that Muslims are allowed to worship openly in Europe. My response to this would be that European countries do claim to offer this freedom in the first place, whereas Islam has never done.

It's difficult because I find it is hard to get some Non-Muslims to understand why this is not hypocritical at all.

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

[Amadeus85]

For me, it's a difficult one really. In a true Islamic state (which I admit, Saudi is not), practise of religions other than Islam is not to be done openly.

What you mean by practising "not openly"? In homes. I thought that building churches is possible in "true" islamic state.

One might argue that Muslims are allowed to worship openly in Europe. My response to this would be that European countries do claim to offer this freedom in the first place, whereas Islam has never done.

It's difficult because I find it is hard to get some Non-Muslims to understand why this is not hypocritical at all.

Maybe its not hipocritical but not fair for sure.

[Keltoi]

To me, it would seem if there is going to be any kind of "coming together" between Christianity and Islam, a Christian should have the right to worship openly in an Islamic country, as Muslims are free to do in the West.

However, I do understand the difference between the "West" and a Christian country. A nation based on Christian theology doesn't exist, if it did it would probably be against the law to practice Islam openly as well. So perhaps it only makes sense that a country that professes to be an Islamic one wouldn't allow other religions to practice freely.

[Uthman]

Greetings Aaron85,

What you mean by practising "not openly"? In homes. I thought that building churches is possible in "true" islamic state.

Hmmm...that may well be true. My impression was otherwise.

What made you think that btw?

Maybe its not hipocritical but not fair for sure.

How so? Would Muslims be allowed to openly practise their religion in a country governed by Christianity?

That's a genuine question, not a leading one. :)

[Amadeus85]

[QUOTE=Osman;920099]Greetings Aaron85,

Hmmm...that may well be true. My impression was otherwise.

What made you think that btw?

Greetings!

There were christians and churches in the time of caliphs in middle east and Turkey hundreds years ago right?

How so? Would Muslims be allowed to openly practise their religion in a country governed by Christianity?

That's a genuine question, not a leading one. :)

Well well thats a very hard question, as I dont know if there were any countries governed by christianity in the history.But lets say that you are right, probably muslims wouldnt be able to be there, as shows the xample of medieval Spain.
But on the other hand, sometimes muslims say that Saudi Arabia is an islamic country and sometimes that it is not. :? It''s confusing. Is Quatar also an islamic country? They have a church also. Egypt also, but they are secular republic i guess. :)

[Whatsthepoint]

The Saudis are very keen to invest millons in building mosques and islamic centres in non-muslim countries, they spend enormous amounts of money to support worldwide terrorism and extremism, they've even got a human rights commision that issued a report about muslims in Europe being denied the right to worship and live by their faith freely...
So I do find their ways to be slightly hypocritical. Now, if they're trying to follow Islam that's ok.
As Osman said, Saudis and Islam never claimed to grant full religious freedom to non-muslims, so I see no reason why they should do so now. Reciprocity cannot be used as an argument in this case as far as I'm concerned.
Many things in Saudi Arabia are wrong and utterly unfair and I don't think religious rights of the majority outweigh any other rights, but this is how things are done over there, if tehy don't want to build churches, no one should force them. Saudi Christians are immigrants, they knew the rules of the country when they came there and they shouldn't try to change them. The indigenous Christian community, should it exists, didn't complain, I have some theories as to why this is, but I'll leave them for later.



I didnt know non muslims were banned from buplic worship in an islamic state, which I find wrong. I'm sure muslims find it perfectly OK and justified, I admit, it is justified, but then everything can be justified, whch doesn't make it fair and good. I guess muslims could stop bragging about how tolerant Islam is towards other religions.

[Whatsthepoint]

Well well thats a very hard question, as I dont know if there were any countries governed by christianity in the history.But lets say that you are right, probably muslims wouldnt be able to be there, as shows the xample of medieval Spain.
But on the other hand, sometimes muslims say that Saudi Arabia is an islamic country and sometimes that it is not. :? It''s confusing. Is Quatar also an islamic country? They have a church also. Egypt also, but they are secular republic i guess. :)

Saudi is trying to be an islamic country, but it is not. The mere fact that it is a country with a flag and a national anthem makes it un-islamic, I think. And then there's loads and loads of other stuff that I'm sure has been discussed on these boards.
Lashing girls for spending a night with non-related men does not make a country an islamic one.

[AvarAllahNoor]

It's GREAT! - The freedom to worship God in the Religion you obey should be allowed worldwide!

Build a Gurdwara too! :D

[Malaikah]

Lashing girls for spending a night with non-related men does not make a country an islamic one.

I'm sure you didn't do it intentionally but seriously the punishment is for the boys and the girls, not just girls!

[Malaikah]

I guess muslims could stop bragging about how tolerant Islam is towards other religions.

Why? Tolerance doesn't mean their religion will be respected by the state in the same way Islam is. They have the right to practise in private. That is tolerance, especially when you consider that we could have forced them to denounce their religion and become Muslim.

[AvarAllahNoor]

Why? Tolerance doesn't mean their religion will be respected by the state in the same way Islam is. .

Why? did Mohammed not respect Judaism and Christianity?

[Ebtisweetsam]

I think i'll stay outta this one.....:X

[Uthman]

:sl:

So are churches allowed in a proper Islamic state? :?

:w:

[Malaikah]

They are allowed to have churches I know that 100%, what I'm unsure about is whether they are allowed to build new ones.

I also don't know if this applies in the Arabian Peninsula...

[Amadeus85]

Why? Tolerance doesn't mean their religion will be respected by the state in the same way Islam is. They have the right to practise in private. That is tolerance, especially when you consider that we could have forced them to denounce their religion and become Muslim.

Im sure that if some european said such things about islam and muslim in our continent, you would call him a rascist bigot :). You dont want to give christians in Arabian Peninsula a single church and see it as ok, and when muslims are asked to build bit smaller mosque than the highest buidling in Colonia, it is called a fascism.

[aamirsaab]

:sl:
I don't recall any ruling in Islam or teaching of the Prophet [saw] that prevents non-muslims from building their place of worship in an Islamic state. Historically, churches etc were already built in those countries where Islamic rule took over.

[Malaikah]

Im sure that if some european said such things about islam and muslim in our continent, you would call him a rascist bigot :). You dont want to give christians in Arabian Peninsula a single church and see it as ok, and when muslims are asked to build bit smaller mosque than the highest buidling in Colonia, it is called a fascism.

Assumptions, assumptions. :rollseyes

[Woodrow]

For me, it's a difficult one really. In a true Islamic state (which I admit, Saudi is not), practise of religions other than Islam is not to be done openly.

One might argue that Muslims are allowed to worship openly in Europe. My response to this would be that European countries do claim to offer this freedom in the first place, whereas Islam has never done.

It's difficult because I find it is hard to get some Non-Muslims to understand why this is not hypocritical at all.

One might argue that Muslims are allowed to worship openly in Europe. My response to this would be that European countries do claim to offer this freedom in the first place, whereas Islam has never done.

That is a good point. I don't see it any different than Vatican City. While Catholics pray in virtually every country, I do not see any big fuss over the fact that you can not build a church,mosque,synagogue,temple of any other denomination in Vatican City.

[Malaikah]

That is a good point. I don't see it any different than Vatican City. While Catholics pray in virtually every country, I do not see any big fuss over the fact that you can not build a church,mosque,synagogue,temple of any other denomination in Vatican City.

Wow, I didn't know that. But I totally agree, it's not like anyone is forcing us to live in a country that doesn't allow us to build a mosque.

[Amadeus85]

One might argue that Muslims are allowed to worship openly in Europe. My response to this would be that European countries do claim to offer this freedom in the first place, whereas Islam has never done.

That is a good point. I don't see it any different than Vatican City. While Catholics pray in virtually every country, I do not see any big fuss over the fact that you can not build a church,mosque,synagogue,temple of any other denomination in Vatican City.

Ha and dont you see the difference between the tiny town Vatican and the whole Arabian Peninsula? Christians dont want to have churches in Mecca or Medina. Not to mention that in Rome close to Vatican muslims have built the bigges mosque in Europe worth millions of petrodollars. I know that Islam has never promised us a freedom of worship, but where are those "islamic" states nowadays? Can you name some?

[Whatsthepoint]

Why? Tolerance doesn't mean their religion will be respected by the state in the same way Islam is. They have the right to practise in private. That is tolerance, especially when you consider that we could have forced them to denounce their religion and become Muslim.

This is not how I picture tolerance.
By today's (western) standards Islam is not really tolerant towards other religions.
I kinda gree with AARON'S COMMENT ON THIS ONE:

Im sure that if some european said such things about islam and muslim in our continent, you would call him a rascist bigot . You dont want to give christians in Arabian Peninsula a single church and see it as ok, and when muslims are asked to build bit smaller mosque than the highest buidling in Colonia, it is called a fascism.

Of course not all muslims are like that, perhaps only a minority is, but it's such views that make it into news.

[Fishman]

:sl:
The FISHMAN EMPIRE will allow people of all religions (exept for weirdy cults like devil-worshipping and scientology etc.) to worship freely. I would ban multinational missionary organisations from building them, but sure, they can worship.

More seriously, Umar refused to pray in the church in Jerusalem (the one with the name that is impossible to pronounce) so that it did not get torn down in the future.
:w:

[AvarAllahNoor]

:sl:
The FISHMAN EMPIRE will allow people of all religions (exept for weirdy cults like devil-worshipping and scientology etc.) to worship freely. I would ban multinational missionary organisations from building them, but sure, they can worship.
:

Building what?

[Fishman]

Building what?

:sl:
Good to see you again!

I mean building Churches and things. Groups that target people of their own religion would be all right, but I'm rather skeptical of international Christian missionary organisations, to be honest. The big ones that everybody has heard of are probably well-organised and don't engage in unscrupulous activities, but one of the smaller ones even tried to abduct hundreds of Chadian kids and take them to France!
:w:

[AvarAllahNoor]

:sl:
Good to see you again!

I mean building Churches and things. Groups that target people of their own religion would be all right, but I'm rather skeptical of international Christian missionary organisations, to be honest. The big ones that everybody has heard of are probably well-organised and don't engage in unscrupulous activities, but one of the smaller ones even tried to abduct hundreds of Chadian kids and take them to France!
:w:

Good to see you too fella!

Yes, that's cool. Those that target people for the sole purpose of conversion, should be banned. Then that applies to ALL religions.

[Fishman]

Good to see you too fella!

Yes, that's cool. Those that target people for the sole purpose of conversion, should be banned. Then that applies to ALL religions.

:sl:
But most people would find the very idea of a globe-spanning invincible Fishman Empire morally repungant anyway. Despite the fact that it would be really, really cool...
:w:

[AvarAllahNoor]

Of course not all muslims are like that, perhaps only a minority is, but it's such views that make it into news.

That's what sells papers.That's what feeds the trolls - Plus it's what gets the debate going! :)

[Fishman]

That's what keeps feeding the trolls -

:sl:
We need something that eats trolls. Like a kind of super troll that goes to the troll forum and says 'hahahaha! all u trolls r loozers!!!11Oneoneone11!!!11!!11!!'.
:w:

[AvarAllahNoor]

:sl:
We need something that eats trolls. Like a kind of super troll that goes to the troll forum and says 'hahahaha! all u trolls r loozers!!!11Oneoneone11!!!11!!11!!'.
:w:

Perhaps, but then we'd get all that tripe about 'Freedon of Speech'

Trolls, sadly are here to stay.

[Uthman]

[AvarAllahNoor]

^^ How appropriate! - BUT If we had no trolls, we'd have nobody to confront. Boring.