Passionate Religious Argumentation: Reaching Consensus in Participatory Decision Making

A considerable amount of research has shown that passionate engagement and the expression of personal experience can lead to vitality, inclusion and consensus inside a deliberative process (e.g., Martin, 2011; Barnes, 2008; Campbell, 2005). Supporters of Habermas´ theory of the “ideal speech situation”, on the other side, emphasize rationalistic norms and argumentation as essential for validating deliberation, considering emotions, i.a., as a threat to impartiality (e.g., Hoggett & Thompson, 2002). Scholars have far less focused on the impact of passionate religious rethoric on the course of deliberative mechanisms such as participatory decision making. The paper follows this gap in the literature and points to the influence of religiously shaped emotional discourses on the outcomes of a decision making event. The case study refers to a public debate held in 2007 at the City of Timisoara (Romania), which we have moderated at that time as an administrative employee. Looking back at the situation as a researcher, we now follow a qualitative approach - analyze existing documents (such as written record of the meeting) and apply our personal observations from an insider perspective. Many examples of religious references in this passionate dispute allow for an in-depth analysis and argumentation, based on ethnography and discourse analysis. The debate gathered around 200 participants and dealt with the intention of the local Orthodox Church (following requests from inhabitants) to build a parish chapel in a central neighborhood - instead of an existing playground (planned to be relocated), next to a school and in the perimeter of some blocks of flats. The City´s chief architect and Church representatives were there to discuss with citizens - for their most part, inhabitants in the area. It turned to emotional discussions between supporters and opponents of the planned construction, lasting about 90 minutes and being interrupted several times with appeals for civilized talks. The Local Council finally agreed on the proposal; however, the decision was one month later retracted and consensus was reached by offering a different place to the Church for building the edifice. The questions we raise at this point are related to the distribution of rational arguments and emotional persuation as impact factors for coming to an agreement and, on the other hand, to the role of religious rethoric in the course of this deliberative process.