The Long-Awaited "Letter"?

Is this it? (letter)  Is this the long-awaited and much-discussed letter from Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams to the Bishops in advance of the Lambeth Conference this summer?  Is this the warning letter +N.T. Wright told everyone about?  In a word, I'm under-whelmed.

Right up front, it becomes very clear that so very little, if anything, will be accomplished, and all he is discussing is the procedural format:

I indicated in earlier letters that the shape of the Conference will be different from what many have been used to.  We have listened carefully to those who have expressed their difficulties with Western and parliamentary styles of meeting, and the Design Group has tried to find a new style – a style more reflective of that Pentecost moment when all received the gift of speaking freely about Christ.

This, of course, is the "Indaba" idea, which +Williams says is a Zulu word for "purposeful discussion among equals."  Aside from the weak effort to pander to the Global South, this is akin to seeing the Methodist Women of my youth dressing in "traditional African attire" for their monthly mission study - can you imagine a group of white-haired, middle-aged women in dashikis?  Yep, about as goofy as a bunch of liberal Anglican and Episcopalian Bishops kidding themselves that they are conducting "Indabas."  Is there any reason to believe that anything will be accomplished in what promises, on some issues, to be a rhetorical free-for-all?

The paragraph which comes the closest to the "warning" we had been led to believe was coming is this one: 

As I noted when I wrote to you in Advent, this makes it all the more essential that those who come to Lambeth will arrive genuinely willing to engage fully in that growth towards closer unity that the Windsor Report and the Covenant Process envisage. We hope that people will not come so wedded to  their own agenda  and their local  priorities that they cannot listen to those from other cultural backgrounds.  As you may have gathered, in circumstances where there has been divisive or controversial action, I have been discussing privately with some bishops the need to be wholeheartedly part of a shared vision and process in our time together.  (my emphasis)

Who exactly has he been talking to, if in reality anyone?  The P.O.?  ++Peter Akinola?  ++Gregory Venables?  Somehow I find it difficult to believe that +Williams has been discussing with any of the major antagonists "the need to be wholeheartedly part of a shared vision and process in our time together," at least not without them laughing in his face.  And why not call out publicly the Bishops to whom he has been speaking?  Were I still Episcopalian, I would think I am entitled to know whether my Bishop has been called on the carpet by the ABC.

+Williams then says: 

Of course, as baptised Christians and pastors of Christ's flock, we are not just seeking some low-level consensus, or a simple agreement to disagree politely.  We are asking for the fire of the Spirit to come upon us and deepen our sense that we are answerable to and for each other and answerable to God for the faithful proclamation of his grace uniquely offered in Jesus. ( my emphasis)

If these words were from anyone of more substance and spine than +Williams, then I might be tempted to find some reason to be excited about his not wanting simply to agree to disagree.  Then I remember that this is the same man who has in the last six months referred to the Christmas story as the "stuff of myth and legend" and who has advocated implementation of Sharia law in British civil courts, and I realize that with him the "fire of the spirit" is akin to a Bic lighter down to its last gram of butane.

Ah yes, Lambeth 2008 - rhetorical free-for-alls called "Indabas" inside the walls accented by the high, keening sound of Gene Robinson working the fan fair outside.  Is this the picture on which much of the Anglican world is hanging its last, best hopes for reconciliation?