I would identify as a King James Bible-believing Baptist that lives by what Paul the Apostle (the apostle to the Gentiles) taught . . . and my marching orders comes for the most part from Romans to Philemon.
“Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth” (2 Timothy 2:15).
That folks have neglected this truth is the reason we are in the mess we are in . . . that and the proliferation of Catholic Bibles (ASV, NKJV, NIV, ESV etc.)
The KJB is my final authority; not a pastor, not a professor, and certainly not myself.
I hate to break the news to to you, but NONE of the examples you cited above are "Catholic Bibles", and no serious practicing Catholic would use them regularly to practice his/her faith, starting with the fact they do not contain the deuterocanonical books like Tobit and Maccabees, and are therefore only useful for studying the protestant books of the bible.
NIV in particular was created by "a team of 15 biblical scholars, representing a variety of evangelical denominations", so it's pretty far removed from any "Catholic" edition of the bible.
The ESV is used by the Lutheran Church–Missouri Synod church on Sundays.
The ASV is the translation used by Jehovah's Witnesses.
The NKJV is used by a variety of protestant denominations who like the original KJV but want "modernized" English grammar and spelling rules, although Orthodox Christians use the NKJV translation of the new testament for their bible study sessions.
ACTUAL Catholic editions of the bible contain all 73 books of the bible, follow Catholic canon law, and come with an imprimatur granted by a Catholic bishop. Examples include the New American Bible (NAB), the Jerusalem Bible (JB), the Christian Community Bible (CCB) and of course the very Shakespearean-sounding Douay–Rheims Bible (DRB), which would be the Catholic equivalent to the King James version for those who insist on English language of the 1600s for their bible of choice.
>> The KJB is my final authority; not a pastor, not a professor, and certainly not myself. <<
You'd have a rough time being a Christian prior to 1611, since according to you there wouldn't have been a single suitable bible in the world to use to practice your faith. Interesting how people practiced their faith just fine for those 1,600 years, isn't it?