Chapter 3 identified the common core of theological beliefs shared by Rational Dissenters and the methods by which those beliefs were arrived at and refined. However, there remains an apparent paradox in Rational Dissent's identity. The pursuit of reason and individual exploration of the Scriptures, as well as exerting a unifying influence, also encouraged a significant degree of diversity over doctrine. That diversity has been underestimated by previous historians of the subject, and this has led to an overconcentration on the doctrine and practice of Richard Price and Joseph Priestley, and a diminution of the roles played by other Rational Dissenters, and especially by its female and male lay adherents.

Although most Rational Dissenters belonged to a congregation, they were not part of a formally constituted denomination, and consequently did not think themselves governed by rules or constrained by any kind of overriding church hierarchy. This remained the case even after the foundation of Unitarian societies. This characteristic constituted an extremely important feature of their identity in this period. One of the key ways in which Rational Dissent was distinctive lay in its strong rejection of the imposition of dogma and its opposition to human formularies. This non-subscribing tradition was not peculiar to Rational Dissenters, but they held and proclaimed it much more firmly than by any other group. Hugh Worthington, minister and tutor at Hackney New College, London, agreed with Joseph Priestley that ‘in being free from the rage of proselytism, I wish all to think for themselves’, and, amongst the Unitarian laity, William Tayleur in Shropshire wrote to Lindsey, ‘I should condemn myself if I ever purposely offered an argument to bring off anyone from his Arian opinion.’ In Taunton Jane Toulmin in 1790 urged the laity to ‘consider a spirit of free enquiry both amongst themselves and their ministers as their greatest glory and privilege’. The level of diversity amongst Rational Dissenters heightened the priority they attached to theological debate. There could be differences of opinion, frankly and honestly debated within Rational Dissent, without diminishing the perception of diversity as a virtue. Candour was a Rational Dissenting watchword.