So you write, yet you do not have those either, hence your quandary. Catholics, who believe in the holy catholic apostolic church founded on the Jewish apostles and prophets, with Messiah himself the chief cornerstone, and relying on his promises to said apostles, are not dependent on Sola Scriptura doctrine that does not have the original inerrant scriptures, for Messiah promised to build a church against which the gates of hell would prevail, not original manuscripts of a Bible, nor a translation thereof.
Yeah we do have what the original writings were ... according to the textual criticism ... except for a few isolated and insignificant points, here and there ... and nothing that affects any teachings.
Keep in mind that all the translations, themselves (the very translation work, itself) is subject to “textual criticism” as to whether we do have those originals (that is, “original translations”), or whether they are fakes or in error (for what we have in hand) ... again ... the “translation” and not talking about the “originals”.
Going further, those “translations” ... they even depended upon the copies of copies, so had to contend with textual criticism, as to what they had was a faithful copy of what God originally wrote in the original languages, plus they also went off of some “translations” themselves.
Just because any translation you choose to refer to or use, no matter where it is from, you’re going to deal with textual criticism of the translation itself, and then of the documents that the translators used, many of which don’t even exist today.
But, all in all, we can affirm that we do have the original Word of God, as God wrote it in the original languages. And from that, we can study it and see what he is telling us.