1. ¹Denison University
2. ²University of Wisconsin

^*An earlier version of this paper was prepared for delivery at the 64th annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, April 20–23, 2006. Data gathered for this paper were funded by a small grant from the Denison University Research Foundation; any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the DURF. We thank Katy Stenger, Aaron Bestic, Jon F. Chesky, Adam Crowther, Andrew Polsky, and the anonymous reviewers at Polity for assistance in various capacities as this work approached its final form.

Abstract

In examining the increasingly popular concept of deliberative democracy, social scientists most often look to "cross-cutting" elements within discussion networks. Studies of deliberation in networks, however, preclude a number of other sources of deliberative discourse, and ignore the important role that some theorists claim for elites, like clergy, in fostering debate in group settings. To this effect we ask: Do clergy model the deliberative process on potentially divisive issues such as gay rights? We employ an original survey instrument administered to clergy in Columbus, Ohio, just after the 2004 election to understand the quantity and diversity of clergy discussion. We find that discussion diversity increases under conditions of congregational disunity, which, somewhat paradoxically, has no effect on the quantity of issue discussion.