From the article:

As king he also bore the title of custodian of Islam’s holiest mosques, in Mecca and Medina, making him one of the faith’s most important figures. […]

That’s a really odd way to describe things. Any Saudi king’s custodianship of Islam’s holiest mosques is basically an accident of his birth and doesn’t confer any special religious authority on him. He (Abdullah) didn’t have the scholarly religious training that would have given him weight as a theologian. AFAIK, neither does the new king nor did any of the past ones.

Additionally, monarchy isn’t part of Islam, and the opulent lifestyle of the Al-Saud clan is a huge departure from Islamic teachings regarding worldly wealth & status.

If anything, what he had, and what his brother Salman now has, would more accurately be described as a rather heavy responsibility, an obligation, to properly protect & maintain the holy places as well as provide for the needs of the millions of Muslims making Hajj & Umrah each year (the latter can be undertaken at any time of the year, unlike the Hajj). They’re important in that sense.

Anyway, I just wanted to make it clear that the custodianship doesn’t grant the caretaker any special status in terms of fiqh (jurisprudence), i.e. he’s not someone Muslims would turn to for religious guidance.