Note that "qui" is not a personal pronoun, hlawson38.
I think you can often write literal translations that are good English, where grammar and sense unite. For instance, what I wrote above is an attempt to do both. I think it best to try, at least, because it humanizes the author. For example, I would say that "being" is a literal translation of "animal" if only because you will find "living being" in a dictionary definition of the Latin "animal" since the definitions of "living being" and "animal" overlap in English and "that" is a literal translation of the Latin "quod", again because the definitions overlap in English ("that" and "which"). I think it better, however, to write the subjunctives as subjunctives. That I didn't do but I agree with you that it is better to attempt to include it in good English and your translated subjunctives are good English.
Non personale pronomen "qui", hlawson, nota.
Meâ sententiâ, fieri nonnunquam potest et verbatim et eleganter in sermones anglicos vertere, ubi grammatica at sensus inter se conveniunt. Nisi fallor sic feci vel facere conatus sum in eo quod suprâ scripsi eodem tempore humaniorem auctorem videri faciens. Subjunctivum autem modum anglicè verè non scripsi et melius esset si id scripsisset ut tu bene scripsisti.
I'm writing in Latin hoping for correction, and not because I'm confident in how I express myself. Latinè scribo ut ab omnibus corrigar, non quod confidenter me exprimam.