I am convinced that it is always the Christian’s task to witness to an alternative narrative, alternative story of justice and power. Moreover, I think that just war theory in practice is “justify all wars” theory.

But I’m just not prepared to say that war is always the worst evil on the table in every circumstance and should therefore be averted.

In what sense are you confronted with geo-political realities that require you to make a decision about employing violence?

The nation states of which we are a part will undoubtedly use violence and generally have to argued into relying less upon those means. We don’t have to make a case for the use of violence. It is the default mode of all or most of the world.

Our call is to learn a different way (against many inclinations, ‘natural’ and ‘cultural’). What is at stake in our showing our supposed ‘realism’ that we think the nation state should use violence as though someone somewhere waits with bated breath for our justification or endorsement?

Unpack please? What was ‘distributed violence”, who thought like that, and absorption of whose violence?