Is the Catholic Legal Thought project too focused on theory?

My recap of the Conference on Catholic Legal Thought prompted a reader (and practicing lawyer) to express his concern that our conversations may be too theoretical and too disconnected from the issues that matter to Catholic lawyers.  Here's an excerpt of his email:

The disassociation between the world of academia and the world of practice is unfortunate, especially because the Catholic faith is a lived aesthetic experience, not something we just know intellectually.  I think a lot of us who are actually practicing law want our friends in academia to do some thinking for us about how we can re-shape the practice of law in the U.S. to make it, as JPII says, "more human and more fraternal."  At some level, this will have to go beyond theoretical discussions about the difference between JPII v. Benedict's view of natural law, and will need to involve a critique of the culture in which lawyers live and work, what impact that culture has on the law and the public's perception of the law, and the connection between the culture of law and justice. . . . Too much emphasis on engaging the "law" can make the needs of the human person secondary or even irrelevant, and can render CST just another academic form of analysis rather than a prophetic movement that seeks the liberation of the human person in his daily struggles and burdens.

He offered several examples of lines of inquiry that he would find helpful:

1. The structure of law firms - billable hours (Kaveny has addressed this a little bit), the commercialization of the practice of law, and the problem of over-specialization; lack of mentoring; the loneliness and competitiveness experienced by associates;

2. The connection between the problems in #1 and the huge tuition bills we have from law school that force, or appear to force, many students into big firms.  Are Catholic law schools helping students to choose their professional paths wisely, or are Catholic law schools just complicit in promoting the dehumanizing aspects of lthe practice of law, with their own focus on rankings, prestige and endowed chairs?

3. The practice of American-style litigation and whether Catholics can/should participate in it (i.e. fomenting conflict in order to keep the billable clock running; overwhelming opponents who don't have deep pockets with filings and delay tactics that have nothing to do with achieving a just result; using the courts to resolve marriage issues - what does "winning" look like in a marriage dispute; etc).

4. What is a profession? Is the current legal profession actually a profession?  Should it matter?  Could a reinvigoration of the concept of "profession" help to change the practice of law and in what ways? 5. In what ways are lawyers participating in the healing work of God?  Doctors and priests are seen, in many circles, as healers; why are lawyers seen as scoundrels?  How does the concept of privilege work into our role as healers, etc. 

These, to me, seem like very practical and very important issues that really affect practicing lawyers (and law students) and that also have a social impact (i.e. how we structure law firms affects how those in need of legal services experience lawyers, either as money-grubbers or servants; how we structure law schools affects how available and disposed students are to pursue careers focused on justice, rather than money; etc.).  I would love to see academics tackle these issues in order to provide law students and practitioners with a new vision of what it means to be a lawyer. 

In fairness, I think some of these areas have been explored by MoJ-ers and other Catholic law profs, but undoubtedly there is more work to be done.  (An area that merits much more exploration, in my view, is the role of Catholic law schools in exacerbating or remedying the plight of the debt-laden law student.)  The broader question -- whether Catholic legal thought is spending too much time on theory -- merits some discussion.  One way I would explain it is this: our project, at least in the context of American law and lawyering, is relatively new.  A significant amount of theoretical spade work is needed in order to make the practical implications authentically insightful, rather than just a dressed-up version of our own predispositions. 

What do others think: has the Catholic legal thought project been too focused on theory?