I really admire Rowan Williams. As far as publicly promoting intellectual theology in the type of language that people in 2009 can relate to, he's your man. However, there are far greater Christian evolutionists who Dawkins could have interviewed, but he of course agrees to debate only sparingly with who he wants on the subject he chooses. I'm not saying that Christian figures don't do this as well, but it seems to be common practice for the "big" athiests, like Dawkins and Maher. For instance, I also respect Bill Maher as a comedian but in Religulous he interviews Francis Collins, famous Christian scientist and head of the human genome project. Instead of talking with him about science and intelligent desing, he only films them talking about the Bible, manuscript tampering, and contradictions between the gospels. Also, I think Dawkins question about God's intervention in creation is really interesting because it raises a really tough question. If God intervened in the Big Bang and ordains and sustains the evolution of life, then why is it that he now supposedly intervenes in human history but not in the cosmos. Williams claims that God set up evolution so that he wouldn't have to intervene in its processes. He simply sustains it. Yet God dramatically intervened in the birth of Jesus and in his miracles. This seems like a big contradiction, but it is possible that there are different categories for divine action. On the one hand, God does not intervene dramatically in evolution or in the daily processes of nature. He does, however, as I think many people can testify, intervene in personal lives, dramatically and also subtly. The reason and necessity for these distinct categories is that, after all, we are the centerpiece and end-goal of the creation, the final product of evolution, if that's what you believe, which I do---that evolution is not without purpose. It is fact, but only because it has been ordained and planned with a specific purpose.