I can't help thinking that this will probably be one of the most boring debates Cambridge has ever seen. As already pointed out by annodomini, much of this has already been said umpteen times and Rowan Williams is often quite a boring speaker.
wisewoman - I quite agree with with adversarial implication suggested in the article. In fact, when I read the 'fighting it out' comment, I decided not to read further. So I remain uninformed about this debate, but can't say I particularly mind.
Why use such language as "fighting it out". I am sure a debate between two well educated people with differing views will be interesting and enlightening whatever your views. Why does it have to be advertised as adversarial. A good debate should give each the opportunity to put their views and hopefully listen to each other respectfully while arguing for their own view. I think nowadays the word "debate" had been debased to mean two people shouting at each other. It does depress me!
Can't imagine Rowan Williams being specially aggressive. Nor can I imagine that anyone in this debate will be breaking new ground. Surely it has all been said before. [bored emoticon]