My apologies, but I don’t really get what you’re saying then. You claim that there’s no evidence that the universe is deterministic. Why would that matter unless you are using that to make the claim that it would not be possible for God to set up the universe with the full knowledge that it would lead to humanity? Further, I don’t understand why you bring God’s free will into it. I point to human free will as a reason for the necessity of divine intervention into a physical world which would need no such intervention. God is omnipotent, so why would He not have set up the universe in a way that it would produce His desired result without having to tinker with it? He could certainly do this, right? Sure, maybe He just likes to tinker, but I’m not the one claiming that your view is definitively wrong. I’m just claiming that my own view is reasonable and not contradicted by either Scripture or science.
(BTW: I’m not Catholic, so Vatican I’s condemnation means nothing to me. Further, as I have tried to explain, perhaps poorly, I am not claiming deism, so the condemnation of deism is irrelevant anyway.)
Because you said: "why could an omnipotent and omniscient being get everything started (ie Big Bang), set up initial condition (laws of science), and let it all work out", as if the universe was a big pile of differential equations and all one needs to do is put in some initial conditions and it will all "work out".
I don’t understand why you bring God’s free will into it
God has free will--he can choose to do works of divine power or miracles, like parting the Red Sea, if He wants to.
I’m not Catholic, so Vatican I’s condemnation means nothing to me.
Yes, but you are asking others, so others are telling you why.
Because Deism is false, and this is not the 18th century or the 17th, so there's no reason for such views, and furthermore it is not fitting to describe acts of God's free will as "tinkering".