In attempting to unravel the instances of disunity throughout the history of the Church, the acute lack or absence of theological dialogue must jump out at the observer. In the presence of civil dialogue (and perhaps less fixation upon the sustenance of institutional bureaucracies), much could have been done to avoid the logical necessity of the fragmentation of the Church in the face of theological dissimilarities.

There must be an attitude of humility in theology. Humility is the climate that provides for healthy dialogue and mutual learning so as to promote a momentum of healthy dialectics within the Body of Christ. But in advancing the case for humility in our theological attitude, I am not appealing for inferiority. Humility and inferiority are different things. Unlike that of a climate of humility, a healthy dialogue cannot take place in an unequal environment of inferiority. Inferiority is not the way of Christ, but humility is.

It may be reasonable to advance that humility is what sets generous orthodoxy apart from unmoving, unembracing, statically fossilised, fundamentalistic evangelicalism.