"Pope prepares to embrace theory of Intelligent Design"

I'll believe it when I see it.

Remember: always take off 20 IQ points when the MSM discusses theology. Take of 50 points when it's Catholic theology. Catholic teaching on creation is extremely nuanced. ID guys have interesting things to say about problems with Darwin. What they don't have yet, from what I can see, is a coherent account of what it is they are attempting: science or philosophy. I'm extremely skeptical that the Church is going to "embrace" anything here. I think the Church will basically say, "Yes, we can make a place at the table for these voices and see what they contribute to the conversation" (which is far more than the "Shut up, he explained" science establishment in the US can tolerate). But that will be about it. There's not going to be any "fundamental shift" in Catholic teaching, because Catholic teaching already affirms a) that God made all things seen and unseen (which is what ID is lurching toward affirming, though it doesn't specifically name You Know Who as the Guy in charge of ID) and b) that secondary causes participated in that process (which is the most evolutionary theory can say before it starts intruding on theology with atheistic materialist claims that secondary causes are really primary causes).

This latter argument was already dealt with by St. Thomas long ago. There are only two arguments against the existence of God: "Why is there evil?" and "Everything seems to run fine without God. So who needs him?" Or as St. Thomas put it:

Objection 1. It seems that God does not exist; because if one of two contraries be infinite, the other would be altogether destroyed. But the word "God" means that He is infinite goodness. If, therefore, God existed, there would be no evil discoverable; but there is evil in the world. Therefore God does not exist.

Objection 2. Further, it is superfluous to suppose that what can be accounted for by a few principles has been produced by many. But it seems that everything we see in the world can be accounted for by other principles, supposing God did not exist. For all natural things can be reduced to one principle which is nature; and all voluntary things can be reduced to one principle which is human reason, or will. Therefore there is no need to suppose God's existence.

Interestingly, those who use evolution to argue against the existence of God rely on the second objection more than the first (though you do get a lot of "Lions eat zebras, so how can God be good?" arguments). But mostly, evolutionary arguments against God say things like, "We used to think God created all these biological wonders, but now we understand the chemical mechanisms by which these changes occurred and we don't need to invoke God to explain them any more, just as we don't have to attribute lightning to the wrath of Zeus or smallpox to demons."

Since both of these objections have been dealt with for 8 centuries by St. Thomas:

Reply to Objection 1. As Augustine says (Enchiridion xi): "Since God is the highest good, He would not allow any evil to exist in His works, unless His omnipotence and goodness were such as to bring good even out of evil." This is part of the infinite goodness of God, that He should allow evil to exist, and out of it produce good.

Reply to Objection 2. Since nature works for a determinate end under the direction of a higher agent, whatever is done by nature must needs be traced back to God, as to its first cause. So also whatever is done voluntarily must also be traced back to some higher cause other than human reason or will, since these can change or fail; for all things that are changeable and capable of defect must be traced back to an immovable and self-necessary first principle, as was shown in the body of the Article.

... I don't see what sort of fundamental shift there could be in Catholic teaching. There's still room for secondary causes (and therefore for some sort of evolution) and there's still the dogmatic insistence on God as Creator (and therefore as the Being to whom Thomas' Argument from Design points).