I don't know. But I could imagine a theoretical computer scientist that didn't really know how to program, or 'use a computer' (I don't necessarily think that that is likely, but I think it might be possible). I had a TA in an algorithm course who claimed, when asked about which data structure was most appropriate for a certain algorithm, that he didn't really know anything about data structures (his background was pure math).

This might be a useless point in the context of something like an undergraduate degree in computer science, though. I guess it is a matter of how theoretical the program is.

Many astronomers don't have to use or deal with telescopes, just like not all particle physicists have to know much about accelerators.

A Turing machine is not a computer, it's much closer to a mathematician writing down a proof: read a couple of symbols, scratch head, write down symbol, go back again. It's a mathematical model for following a sequence of steps and closely tied to logic, much more so than it is similar to a computer.