Oh, and by the way,
“The approved notes in your official Bible states,”
I have no “official Catholic Bible” other than the Nova Vulgata. And the notes in the NAB/RE are not an official text in any sense. They are “approved”, but not official teachings of the Catholic Church.
Official Latin text at least, which is a result of Trent decreeing the Vulgate to be the trusted, authentic text of the Bible, but not a specific version, resulting in various attempts to create a standardized one, and the interesting story of the Sistine Vulgate .
Trent also stated, "Sacred Scripture, especially this well-known Old Vulgate edition, shall be published as correctly as possible." More: http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=7470
And as regards official Bible, I was referring to this:
There is only one English text currently approved by the Church for use in the United States. This text is the one contained in the Lectionaries approved for Sundays & Feasts and for Weekdays by the USCCB and recognized by the Holy See. These Lectionaries have their American and Roman approval documents in the front. The text is that of the New American Bible with revised Psalms and New Testament (1988, 1991), with some changes mandated by the Holy See where the NAB text used so-called vertical inclusive language (e.g. avoiding male pronouns for God). Since these Lectionaries have been fully promulgated, the permission to use the Jerusalem Bible and the RSV-Catholic at Mass has been withdrawn.” http://www.ewtn.com/expert/answers/bible_versions.htm
And which 1991 version has apparently been succeeded by the 2011 New American Bible Revised Edition
And the notes in the NAB/RE are not an official text in any sense.
I understand that, while going beyond the the "approved" category (and then their is the "authentic") to official, all that the CCC officially states is not necessarily infallible. But the Nihil obstat and Imprimatur, which type of sanction has a long history , is supposed to give assurance that it contains nothing contrary to faith or morals. “The Imprimatur and Nihil Obstat are official declarations that a work is free from doctrinal or moral error. In a sense, this represents a negative approbation. It says the work contains no doctrinal or moral error. No implication is given, however, that the work has been endorsed by those who have granted the ecclesiastical approval or that they agree with the content, opinions or statements expressed in the work.” — http://old.usccb.org/catechism//update/spring98.shtml
And Canon law states that pastors of the Church have "the duty and the right to demand that where writings of the faithful touch upon matters of faith and morals, these be submitted to their judgement." (823; http://www.intratext.com/IXT/ENG0017 /_P2P.HTM)
Yet these are decreasingly seen today, with some RCAs no longer bothering to attempt to obtain the stamps for their works.
This is a tangent, but would you agree that the Imprimatur and Nihil Obstat give assurance that a work is free from doctrinal or moral error?