There is no changing of the subject. The notes in the NAB and the CE were invoked as relevant to Judith and Tobit not warranting inclusion as Scripture, while Vehementer Nos was invoked as relevant to your attempt to dismiss what they say.
And which is relevant to the larger issue of the presumed veracity of Rome, which is the real basis for assurance on the canon for a faithful RC.
Here, Pope Pius X is addressing the nation of France, after it had brought in an anti-Christian, secularist government. He warns them that the State cannot be divorced from Christianity else calamity will befall society. Was he not proven correct?
It is you who is not correct, since you simply cannot restrict the popes statement to that of State being divorced from Christianity - the occasion - for it make no such distinction, but is a basic requirement that is clearly reiterated in other papal statements. Would you like to see them?
The problem with NAB is that it was corrupted by even Church leaders following pop culture and secular ideology... and Rome intervened and set things straight. You attack the Church because the NAB looked to secular culture for biblical exegesis ... until the Pope straightened them out, then attack the Church because the Pope condemned looking to secular culture for moral guidance!
Are you serious? The Pope straightened them out? 
It was It was a Pope, Pius XII who in 1943 issued an encyclical letter (the Divino afflante Spiritu) in which he encouraged Roman Catholic scholars to make translations of the Bible from the original languages rather than from the Latin Vulgate, and which resulted in "New American Bible," after the necessary approvals from the Bishops and the Vatican, being published under your "watchful" shepherd. Pope Paul VI in 1970; Which for decades now has educated readers with its continuing (in the NABRE) liberalism, such as its aversion to using porneia” as “sexual immorality” or anything sexual in places such as 1Cor. 5:1 ; 6:13 ; 7:2 ; 10:8 ; 2Cor. 12:21 ; Eph. 5:3 ; Gal. 5:19 ; Col. 3:5 ; 1Thes. 4:3 , simply rendering it “immorality” instead, even though in most cases it is in a sexual context.
And then there are other problems such as its general preference for gender-neutral words, etc. in addition to its many (not all) liberal notes. Following the decree of Pope Leo III issued in 1897 (Officiorum ac munerum), that since more harm than good arises if the Sacred Books are permitted everywhere and without discrimination in the vernacular, then all versions in vernacular languages are wholly prohibited unless they be approved by the apostolic see, or edited under the vigilance of the bishops, with annotations drawn from the holy Fathers of the Church, or from the writings of Catholic doctors.
The 1917 Codex Iuris Canonici, canon 1391 includes Catholic writers as such commentators. The revised code of 1983, canon 825 regarding this, simply requires such to be provided with "necessary and sufficient annotations."
Thus Roman Catholic publishers are required to provide explanatory notes in their versions of the Bible. which after almost 50 years even on the Vatican web site teach readers such errors as that the account of the Nephilim in the story of the Flood of Noah (Gn. 6:1-4), was
"apparently a fragment of an old legend that had borrowed much from ancient mythology," and that the story of the Flood, based on the discredited discredited liberal JEDP theory, is from two sources, which "go back ultimately to an ancient Mesopotamian story of a great flood, preserved in the eleventh tablet of the Gilgamesh Epic." The NABRE says the like in your bishops web site, "the text [Gn. 6:1-4) apparently alluding to an old legend," and relies in the same liberal JEDP theory, and concludes "The biblical story ultimately draws upon an ancient Mesopotamian tradition of a great flood.." who occupies the office RCs tell us what we need to look to prevent such problems.
And like the NAB, the NABRE still fosters a non-historical understanding of certain stories which the NT treats as literal historical accounts,such as saying of the book of Jonah, "As to genre, it has been classified in various ways, such as parable or satire" without mentioning the classic (and correct) literal view.
Of course, the NAB study Bible , which is and has been sold and read for decades, goes further Left.
The NABRE (Nihil Obstat; Imprimatur) carries on this liberal tradition, stating such things as
Many of the biblical stories are shaped according to traditional literary or mythic patterns that make their reliability suspect. For example, the common Near Eastern myth popularly known as the conflict myth, one that describes a young warrior-god’s rise to kingship by defeating an old god or force who poses a threat to the order and stability of the world, is transformed by the biblical writers into a literary pattern that shapes the stories of the Exodus, Joshua’s conquest of Canaan, and Saul’s election as king. Many other stories utilize such literary patterns. The traditional motif of the barren mother of an important person, for example, is used in the stories of Sarai and Isaac, Rachel and Joseph, and Hannah and Samuel.
The biblical writers’ use of traditional literary and mythic patterns to tell their stories of Israel calls into question not only the narrative of the events but also the historical value of many details of the stories. This particular style of the biblical writers does not necessarily mean that no actual events lie beneath the narrative, but at the very least it indicates that the presentation of such events has been shaped to conform to a traditional interpretive framework...
The story of the Israelites’ ancestors in Genesis is composed of numerous, originally independent folk tales.... some aspects of the story [of Exodus] cannot be historical." Likewise Job is a "reworked folktale."
Thus rather than Rome setting things straight, it was Rome who made things crooked, and has not made things straight. The NAB has had 4 revisions, yet show us how the revisions, including how the NABRE "sets things straight," including (speaking about "straight") not calling fornication just that, and the preference for gender-neutral language being the rule except where the use of gender-neutral language would create awkward phrasing.
A RC reviewer says of the NABRE:
Instead, with the NABRE, the U.S. Bishops have used inclusive language more extensively than ever before. Masculine references are obscured or neutered. But of course all feminine references are retained. The use of the Biblical phrase ‘sons of Israel’, indicating the Israelites as a group led by men, which is thoroughly attested to in manuscripts, is utterly rejected. References using the term ‘man’ and to mankind using the term ‘man’ or ‘mankind’ are also rephrased. The only exception seems to be in the Psalms, which allows some traditional phrasings, such as ‘Blessed is the man’ and ‘the son of man’. However, even the Psalms have substantial use of inclusive language in many places.
The 2010 NABRE has some revisions to the Old Testament and contains the 1986 New Testament, a fresh translation from the Greek text, but the revision of the Psalms (from the 1986 Revised NAB) was required for liturgical use (at Mass in the Dioceses of the United States and the Philippines), because of the extensive application of gender-neutral language in the 1986 text. And as described, old problems still remain in all NAB versions.
The USCCB, under the Pope, yet sanctions the NAB for RCs to read, as well as the NABRE, while revision of the New Testament of the New American Bible Revised Edition is only expected to be done around the year 2025, enabling a single version to be used for individual prayer, catechesis and liturgy. Which pertains to a confused state of affairs . .
Thus rather than Rome and the pope straightening things out, it was Rome under pope that we see things that need straightening out, and which continue! Yet rather than ascertaining the validity of what church teaching is, RCs tell us we need to submit to Rome, which they manifest they are bound to defend even to the point of repulsive intellectual suicide. The pope straightening things out? No thanks. He and they need to be straightened out