The history of the King James Bible and its impact on evangelism and church planting throughout the world for over 300 years is proof positive that God blessed this translation above all English translations. Indeed even to this day all reliable and conservative Bible study tools are based upon the King James Bible.
The Trinitarian Bible Society -- which had (and has) some outstanding conservative scholars -- took an implacable stand in publishing only the KJB in English, and all its foreign language translations being based upon the Masoretic and Received Texts.
Even the Jewish Publication Society -- which could have made its own translation of the Old Testament -- chose the King James Bible as its preferred translation (originally).
The enmity of the Catholic Church against William Tyndale as well as the King James Bible (which is hugely influenced by Tyndale) is another proof that the enemy of our souls hates this translation and has done everything in his power to attack it or try to replace it. Modern Bible versions are primarily based upon Codex Vaticanus, which is found in the pope's library. Vaticanus is one of the most corrupt Greek manuscripts, but it was elevated to the position of an idol by Westcott & Hort, and continues to impact all modern versions.
But the translators of the KJB exposed all the Catholic translations as being very faulty when they wrote their Preface (The Translators to the Reader) to the original version. Yet you have persisted in calling the KJB a "Catholic Translation".
'But now the Latin Translations were too many to be all good, for they were infinite (Latini Interpretes nullo modo numerari possunt, saith S. Augustine). Again they were not out of the Hebrew fountain (we speak of the Latin Translations of the Old Testament) but out of the Greek stream, therefore the Greek being not altogether clear, the Latin derived from it must needs be muddy...
...For what varieties have they, and what alterations have they made, not only of their Service books, Portesses and Breviaries, but also of their Latin Translation?... If we should tell them that Valla, Stapulensis, Erasmus, and Vives found fault with their vulgar Translation, and consequently wished the same to be mended, or a new one to be made, they would answer peradventure, that we produced their enemies for witnesses against them...
...But what will they say to this, that Pope Leo the Tenth allowed Erasmus' Translation of the New Testament, so much different from the vulgar, by his Apostolic Letter and Bull...If they say, it was one Pope's private opinion, and that he consulted only himself; then we are able to go further with them, and to aver, that more of their chief men of all sorts, even their own Trent champions Paiva and Vega, and their own Inquisitors, Hieronymus ab Oleastro, and their own Bishop Isidorus Clarius, and their own Cardinal Thomas a Vio Caietan, do either make new Translations themselves, or follow new ones of other men's making, or note the vulgar Interpreter for halting; none of them fear to dissent from him, nor yet to except against him....Nay, doth not Sixtus Quintus confess, that certain Catholics (he meaneth certain of his own side) were in such an humor of translating the Scriptures into Latin, that Satan taking occasion by them, though they thought of no such matter, did strive what he could, out of so uncertain and manifold a variety of Translations, so to mingle all things, that nothing might seem to be left certain and firm in them, etc.?'
