"Modern scholars' consensus" is that:
there is no archaeological evidence that the events described in Exodus occurred.
Moses (as described in the Exodus and other books) is a legendary figure, and not a historical one.
However, in the key episode of the Transfiguration, as written in the synoptic gospels, it is recounted that Moses and Elijah appeared to Jesus, and they were conversing. Similarly, in many verses Jesus refers to Moses, indicating perhaps that he actually existed, as we would not expect Jesus to lie (although the argument could be made that he was talking to the Hebrews in their own terms, i.e. assuming the myth of the Exodus, if it is a myth).
All mentions of Moses in the Catechism seem not to discuss his historicity, treating events as if they happened. There is however the same treatment for Adam, which we know the Catholic Church does not dogmatically claim to be a historical figure. For instance, Adam's entry in the Catholic Encyclopedia (with Imprimatur) reads:
To what extent these chapters should be considered as strictly historical is a much disputed question, the discussion of which does not come within the scope of the present article.
However, when it comes to Moses, the Encyclopedia states:
To deny or to doubt the historic personality of Moses, is to undermine and render unintelligible the subsequent history of the Israelites.
This seems to be a more stronger case for historical reality. Thus, the question: does the Catholic Church declares as dogma of faith that Moses actually existed? I see that some christian denominations do not consider Moses to have been physically there in the Transfiguration event (whilst still not necessarily denying his historicity).