As bishops inside his own church line up against the Archbishop of Canterbury, circulating "whispers of discontent" about the quality of his leadership, commentators at the Lambeth Conference with long memories have begun comparing Dr Rowan Williams to Harold Wilson.

It is said of Wilson that his greatest achievement was holding off schism in the Labour Party, as he battled with the trade unions in the face of attempts to modernise his party. The division happened anyway, though later, and today we have the LibDems as a result. His reputation might not have been damaged had the SDP been founded under his watch, but his legacy would have been different.

For a man whose strategies seem rooted in the quasi-Marxist student politics of the 1970s, it is perhaps not surprising that Dr Williams reponse to dissent is so Wilsonian. Organise as many meetings, commissions and reports, the logic goes, and everyone will be too engaged or simply too tired to walk away.

At Lambeth, Dr Williams has set up not just one, but four of these things. There are probably even more, hidden away between the small print of the 37-page "reflections" document that has come out of two weeks of African-style conflict resolution in "indaba" groups. The documents, meetings and commissions all have the same end in mind, to avoid a decision, ever, and thereby avoid schism.

That's the kind of result the Church of England should have expected when it chose an Archbishop whose socialist political bent is twinned with a brilliant academic brain.

The four key initiatives discussed at Lambeth are the Pastoral Forum, the Covenant, the Canon Law blueprint and the Faith and Order Commission. They are all designed basically to do the same thing: to keep everyone around a table, talking, until they are all just so grateful to get back to their dioceses that schism is the last thing on their minds.

The strategy has worked and from the perspective of avoiding schism, Lambeth has been a success. If it falls apart in the end, it will most likely be under Dr Williams' successor.

But not all Anglicans like success. Their gospel is the Christ-like one of victory through defeat, preferably crucifixion. In response to his failure to have a good public row and bring about schism, Dr Williams is facing rebellion within the ranks, although all done with the nicest of English smiles, a handshake or two and the Christian "sign of the peace".

Some bishops believe a £5 million-plus conference with a deficit of up to £2 million was a waste of money. These bishops, many of them senior, are beginning to circulate some Anglican "whispers of discontent" about the leadership of Dr Williams. They have even begun speaking of another diocesan, a thrusting, youngish, photogenic evangelical, who might be suited to take his place.

The Archbishop of Canterbury is not elected. The Prime Minister has a hand in his choosing. But if Dr Williams lost the confidence of his house of bishops, his position would become more difficult. The voting on women bishops at the recent General Synod of the Church of England showed how divided the bishops already are, with an even split and one abstention on the most crucial amendment.

Everything hangs on Dr Williams' final presidential address, at 3.30pm today. In this, he will outline more details of the new Pastoral Forum, including the name of its chairman. There are possibly half a dozen men - it would have to be a male bishop - in the Anglican Communion who would be accepted by the majority of bishops from the centre, conservative and liberal parties. If he chooses the right man, Dr Williams could still go down in history as the man who saved the Anglican Communion. If not, it will be difficult not to conclude that the end might not have happened yet, but it is nigh.