Religion & Law

Marc DeGirolami adds these further comments to our discussion of CLT's focus on theory:

Part of the trouble with these sorts of discussions is that it is difficult to know exactly what lawyers "need" from Catholic legal thought.  Sometimes what they need isn't what they think they need.  Sometimes what they think they need is only one small tip of an iceberg that extends much further down than they know about, or perhaps even want to know about.  And I hastily add that I am very much among those lawyers who do not know, but who want to know. 

 

I am not in disagreement with your correspondent that it is foolish to ignore matters of practicality, or application.  But I do very much think that it is unwise to tear away the top-most branch of a tree -- because the urgencies of the day-to-day are all too pressing, or because one just wants to be told the "takeaway" (an ugly, voguish phrase suggesting that what is not immediately consumable is probably useless anyway), or because one finds the branch especially aesthetically pleasing all by itself -- and expect that little fragment to live for long.  The branch belongs to the tree.  I am not suggesting that your correspondent thinks otherwise.  Yet sometimes I wonder in discussions about theory and practice whether those "against theory" can really be against it and still retain a proper sense of intellectual self.