First I would just like to say that the Latin Vulgate is not the official bible of the Catholic Church. Here in America, the NAB is the official bible of the Catholic Church. The NAB is said in every Catholic Church here in America. It is the official bible here in America.
To say that someone can’t take a protestant bible and turn it catholic is like saying that the early church fathers wouldn’t have been able to take pagan things and turn them into catholic things. Which is exactly what they did. Any bible that has protestant origins can be turned into a catholic bible.
Now, before I talk about he Vulgate I am going to talk about the original KJV. The original KJV was made from 6 manuscripts and the rest was taken from the Latin Vulgate. It was made with 6 because that is all that it had. Nowadays, bible scholars compare thousands of manuscripts together. If the Vulgate was written before the KJV, that would mean that when the Vulgate was put together that probably even less manuscripts were used to create the vugate. So to say that the Vulgate is free from error or to say that the Vulgate is the most accurate is totally false.
Also, there are no original manuscripts of the bible, all we have are copies and I doubt that when Jerome had the original manuscripts back in the 3rd century. It should also be known that the Latin Vulgate was a direct translation from the Hebrew Old testament, not the Septuagint when ever he could to get the Hebrew.
I use the RSV - CE because the translators did use thousands of manuscripts to translate. I also use it because out current pope uses it, Scott Hahn uses it, and I could cite all the reasons that porthos11 gave also.
So far, I have given evidence as to why I like the RSV - CE. You have given no evidence as to why the RSV is bad. All you have said is that it gave you bad vibes and you made accusation saying that they had alterior motives. I would like to see some evidence please as to why it give you bad vibes and I would like to know what these “alterior motives” are.