Just for the record, since we’re on the Catholic Answers website, let’s see what they have to say:
"The Catholic Church has always taught that “no real disagreement can exist between the theologian and the scientist provided each keeps within his own limits. . . . If nevertheless there is a disagreement . . . it should be remembered that the sacred writers, or more truly ‘the Spirit of God who spoke through them, did not wish to teach men such truths (as the inner structure of visible objects) which do not help anyone to salvation’; and that, for this reason, rather than trying to provide a scientific exposition of nature, they sometimes describe and treat these matters either in a somewhat figurative language or as the common manner of speech those times required, and indeed still requires nowadays in everyday life, even amongst most learned people” (Leo XIII, Providentissimus Deus 18).
“As the Catechism puts it, “Methodical research in all branches of knowledge, provided it is carried out in a truly scientific manner and does not override moral laws, can never conflict with the faith, because the things of the world and the things the of the faith derive from the same God. The humble and persevering investigator of the secrets of nature is being led, as it were, by the hand of God in spite of himself, for it is God, the conserver of all things, who made them what they are” (CCC 159). The Catholic Church has no fear of science or scientific discovery.”
Exactly. No conflict. Whatsoever.
Just for more fun, I’ll thow in a Time article from 2001: http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,134926,00.html
“Indeed, reading the entire Bible literally has not been a dominant practice among Catholics through much of the 20th century. Asked about the Pope’s statement, Father Peter Stravinskas, editor of the 1991 Catholic Encyclopedia, said, “It’s essentially what Augustine was writing. He tells us that we should not interpret Genesis literally, and that it is poetic and theological language.””
Or let’s analyze Ratzinger’s series of sermons in 1981: https://www.hprweb.com/2009/01/reading-genesis-with-cardinal-ratzinger/ (Homiletic and Pastoral Review, pretty radical stuff, huh?)
“As Cardinal Ratzinger has convincingly argued, in the case of the Hexaemeron [Genesis], we have to depart from a reading that is limited to the literalist sense because studies of ancient texts and ancient cultures — and not natural science — have given us good and necessary reasons for doing so. Sticking to a literalist reading of Genesis would do violence to the original meaning of the human author and thus to the truth God wanted to manifest through his words.”
Or if you don’t like Ratzinger (too liberal???) then try Cardinal Schonborn: “Evolution in the sense of common ancestry might be true, but evolution in the neo-Darwinian sense — an unguided, unplanned process of random variation and natural selection — is not." (more liberal clap trap?)