Sadly this disagreement by Christians on the most accurate translations is one of the most difficult problems for Christians facing skeptics. Like on atheist fellow I know left Christianity and became atheist for various reasons but among his objections is that Christians cannot seem to agree on what exactly is the proper form of Christianity and thus translation of Scripture. He made this point for all religions and thus is either atheist or agnostic. Not that we have to satisfy the folly of heathens but it it one problem we face. I think all religions, because they have a human aspect, are bound to internal disagreement--whether Islam's disagreement on what Mohammed taught, the disagreement among Jews on problem Judaism, or among Christians. And it's one of the things that led to the Great Schism and other schisms like the Reformation.
I think honest Christians will agree that some translations are better than others--whether for accuracy or simple taste. I have to say, whether it makes me a snob or not, that some of these modern translations among Evangelicals as well as Catholics are ridiculous. I think the Jerusalem translation is like a more accurate than the Douay Rheims even if the Douay's language has a loftiness in its tastes. Still some translations are not just tasteless but inaccurate to the point of causing great problems in ones understanding of theology. One reason the Roman Church may have been trying to "keep the Bible" from the people, which is a false claim with only a hint of truth, is because of this very problem of translating the Scripture from the original to the vernacular. The Church did not really keep the Bible form the people, but one did have to know Latin and the majority of people did not. The Church had a reason to fear some translation by some Every-day-Joe. But even the Latin Vulgate is a translation so whether we believe the greatness of St. Jerome's translation or not, we must admit it has certain problems. That is why I prefer the Jerusalem Bible for accuracy. After all it is tasteful in its language and was translated on the desire of Pius XII to have a more direct and accurate translation.
I think the West, particularly Western trads, have this idea that Latin is THE language, forgetting that there is and was a Greek East, and though it made sense to translate to the then vernacular of Latin, Greek is the original language of the New Testament. So however great Latin may be, Greek is what one must look to and that is hard because of the meaning of words varies. Like the translation of Hades into English is properly "hell", but it would be more proper to translate it as Death or the "abode of the dead". It does not help that the historical English translation went from Greek/Hebrew to Latin and then to English. And even translating from the original can be hard because Greek has varying words for the kinds of love and St. Paul is not speaking of eros when he speaks of having charity. Yes, it can translate simply to love, but the connotations, like translation Hades to hell create problems. It's a mess.