>> “The Catholic Bible outdates the King James version by well over a thousand years.” <<
.
Really a misconception.
There really never was any movement to even have an official ‘catholic’ Bible until the KJV became available. The Douay Rheims is essentially a slightly modified KJV that was issued because catholics began to demand a Bible when so many Geneva and KJV Bibles began to be printed with the Gutenberg press.
Prior to that Bible codices were rare, and all differed slightly from one another because they were hand copied, sometimes from differing manuscripts that happened to be available to the particular scribe.
Prior to the printed Bible, the chief difference between protestant Bibles and catholic Bibles was the OT. Catholics mostly used the LXX, and Protestants used the Masoretic scrolls, each being translated mostly into latin if they were translated at all.
I'm not sure either of us know the point you are trying to make here. Maybe you are trying to conflate "official" from Nihil Obstat and codex with canon.
Codices predated the Canon of the Bible in most cases and very few are considered anything more than an errant collection if both inerrant and errant works. None that I am aware of precisely reflect the canon as adopted by the Church at the Council of Rome and that has been used by Christendom for the subsequent 1,00 years until the Reformation sought to reduce it. And then, sot even the Reformation relied on any of these codices as a decisive Table of Contents.
If you are trying to rely on these as Scripture then you are on far shakier ground than the Catholics you accuse of elevating Tradition over Scripture. The Magisterial mandate of the Church strived to make every translation of the Bible, into every vernacular language, a true and faithful (orthodox) version and sought to ban those that fell short or advocated any heretical positions.
The purpose of a written Bible was to aid the various and growing Catholic Churches and Dioceses in determining the Traditions to be passed on and the Scripture to be read in the Liturgy.
Until error and heresy were introduced in a way that could affect more than the authors there was really no controversy and no need for anything to be banned.
. Really a misconception. There really never was any movement to even have an official ‘catholic’ Bible until the KJV became available.
How is it that you are so wrong in so many ways so consistently?
You may bruit on about Origen, but Origen did not get the eventual canon correct. Scripture was accepted in a Catholic Council in 393 in Hippo and confirmed in Carthage in 397 and 419. Well, you only missed it by 1200 years or so.