I read the NAB every day. When I purchased my copy I turned to Luke to see how kecharitomene was translated. Needless to say, I was disappointed. But, I still read it every day.
The commentary can be distracting, but then the commentary is not Holy Writ. When one relies on the theoretical document 'Q' as a key to understanding how the Gospels were composed, it's a matter of pure speculation.
This is a very important article. The Bible which is by far the most widely distributed among Catholics is just chock full of heresy in virtually every footnote. My daughter was given one of these for her high school theology class, and I was shocked by what I read. Such Bibles are without question a danger to one's faith. It would be prideful and imprudent to say, "Others might be affected by the heresy, but I won't be."
This is looking at the issue of the blatant heresy contained in the footnotes, but there is the broader issue of the translation itself which was done by men with the same heretical views that are reflected in the footnotes. The errors in the translation will be much harder to detect.
Don't get me started. You wouldn't believe how apostate and even downright atheist the NAB USED to be. Believe it or not, you have the IMPROVED version. I have an easier time imagine Saddam Hussein making it to heaven that Cdl Bernadin, who approved the NAB's committee. Satan never had a better friend in the RCC than Bernadin.
Yes, the Bible says it's wise to search the Scriptures for the truth and to consult questionable teachings against its infallible words, but with the plethora of various Bible translations it is equally imperative to verify their content against the perennial ORAL teachings of the Catholic Church. This is why Saint Paul clearly taught, "So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter," (2 Thes. 2:15) and which he reitterated in 2 Thes. 3:6.
"Neo-Conservative" Catholic Peter Kreeft wrote a Bible for Catholic youth called "The Source". This version is a perfect example of the dangers and errors of reading new-age Catholic or Protestant Bibles. In "The Source" Peter Kreeft has the Virgin Mary saying in Luke 1: "For behold, henceforth all generations will call me happy"--.
Having Mary say that she will be called 'happy' for all time is a far cry from her being called "blessed" for all generations, (which the old Douay Rheims Bible says). As we Catholics all know Mary's title is "The BLESSED Virgin Mary", not "Happy Virgin Mary". Kreeft's corruption of this verse also makes it difficult for Catholic apologists to defend Mary's title and Heavenly position of "Blessed" against the blasphemies of the Protestants, many of whom refer to Mary as "an incubator".
If you can read Latin or Greek then you're better off than I am. Find yourself a very old Latin or Greek version with the Roman Catholic Imprimatur or Official approbation. Otherwise, just read the Douay Rheims English language Bible, it's the best one out there.
Shall we all blame St. Jerome?
This is a little thing -- but I guess some people may want to make a mountain out of a molel hill.
BTW, with each day's readings, annalex has been posting the Douay-Rheims and the Vulgate translations. It's neat to compare them!
Someone will need to step in for him because he is moving to Sacramento, however.