'...the separatist and the inclusivist should respect one another, keeping in mind that great buildings are sometimes raised on rejected cornerstones.
Both of these ecclesiological postures require constant attention and criticism, of course. They are makeshift correctives for the opposing errors of schism and indiscipline which afflict the church in its imperfect historical existence. Each is slightly off balance, and needs repeated tuning so that it can avoid collapsing into parochial sectarianism or indiscriminate spiritual chaos.
The separatist needs to be reminded to maintain realistic contact with inclusivist denominations and federations and seek federal (and where possible, organic) union with other Evangelical bodies. The fact that separatists often neglect these unitive procedures and even indulge in further separations is presumptive evidence that the original separation from the parent body was not fully principled but motivated by parochialism, hypercritical perfectionism or the source which Paul indicates as the root cause of schism, an exagerrated view of one's tradition, party or personal leadership which puts any one or all of these ahead of the unity of the body of Christ.
The inclusivist needs to be warned to exercise discipline where this is necessary for the health of the church and be advised to strive for sharp doctrinal clarity in the midst of twilight surroundings. Some inclusivists have remained in their denominations mainly because they have always been a little fuzzy in their doctrinal awareness. They can easily fall into a posture of downplaying doctrines altogether as a divisive factor and sustituting experience.'
Richard Lovelace, Dynamics of Spiritual Life, p.312.
