The NABRE is largely a product of the Catholic Church, and it is approved by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. It's even available online at the USCCB website. So I was surprised to find that many of the notes in the translation propose that the bible contains errors - not just transcription or translation errors, but legitimate errors in the original.
Let me focus on a particularly flagrant example, in Matthew 21. Here is the text that the notes discuss:
(Matthew 21:1-7, NABRE) When they drew near Jerusalem and came to Bethphage on the Mount of Olives, Jesus sent two disciples, saying to them, "Go into the village opposite you, and immediately you will find an ass tethered, and a colt with her. Untie them and bring them here to me. And if anyone should say anything to you, reply, 'The master has need of them.' Then he will send them at once." This happened so that what had been spoken through the prophet might be fulfilled:
"Say to daughter Zion,
'Behold, your king comes to you, meek and riding on an ass, and on a colt, the foal of a beast of burden.'"
The disciples went and did as Jesus had ordered them. They brought the ass and the colt and laid their cloaks over them, and he sat upon them.
And now the notes in question:
(Note on verse 2) An ass tethered, and a colt with her: instead of the one animal of Mk 11:2, Matthew has two, as demanded by his understanding of Zec 9:9.
(Note on verses 4-5) The prophet: this fulfillment citation is actually composed of two distinct Old Testament texts, Is 62:11 (Say to daughter Zion) and Zec 9:9. The ass and the colt are the same animal in the prophecy, mentioned twice in different ways, the common Hebrew literary device of poetic parallelism. That Matthew takes them as two is one of the reasons why some scholars think that he was a Gentile rather than a Jewish Christian who would presumably not make that mistake (see Introduction).
(Note on verse 7) Upon them: upon the two animals; an awkward picture resulting from Matthew’s misunderstanding of the prophecy.
The editors seem to believe that Matthew has invented the details of the story of Jesus' entrance into Jerusalem, and furthermore that the chosen details reflect a misunderstanding of Zechariah 9:9.
Does the Catholic Church's understanding of biblical inerrancy really allow for the possibility that these notes are correct?