Competition occurs when science is taken as competent and sufficient to answer metaphysical questions … or when theology is taken as required to answer mechanistic questions about the nature of the universe, from supernovas, to the diversity of life, to the progression of seasons and development of storms, to the reason why the Mississippi flows from Minnesota to the Gulf of Mexico rather than vice versa."
TE has often misunderstood the very heart of the theological viewpoints that stand in opposition to Theistic Evolution. Who really argues that theology answers "mechanistic" questions about the universe? Who argues that the Bible directly addresses the question of the direction of the Mississippi river? While some may ask the question "how might a narrative relate to the physical universe" and speculate on the implications, there is no real suggestion that the Bible itself speaks as a science book. The primary issue is not that the bible answers "mechanistic" questions, but whether it is true when it touches on historical ones.
If the events in the New Testament or the Old Testament including early chapters of Genesis did not happen, that changes the Biblical narrative itself, and thus changes the meaning of the text, changes the theology. That is the central question, and TE tends to put that question in a box and hide it safely away.
