"(… …) there would have to be preliminary discourse about a richer sense of rationality, one not limited to the natural sciences. (… …)." "The body of Christ, present in the sacrament of the Eucharist, although real (neither symbolic nor metaphorical), is vastly different from the ordinary bodies subject to empirical analysis. It is sacramental presence and theology, aided by philosophy, (… …)". "(… …)informed Catholics ought to be far better prepared to use reason itself to defend what they believe on faith".

How on Earth can be used a richer sense of “rationality”, not limited to the natural sciences, to convince people that a chunk of bread, through a “magic ritual”, has been turned into the flesh of a sky ju-ju? Can a person, no matter how Roman Catholic s/he may be, use reason to defend a matter of faith? And in this case a matter of sheer idiocy. The theology of other religions say nothing about transubstantiation and I doubt that any RC with a spark of intelligence can believe in this nonsense. And I haven't got the faintest idea how philosophy can explain this. As one of the posts on this Wabe says: it's a word salad. The same word salad that "explains" the Holy Trinity, virgin births, resurrections, etc. Word salad? It would be far more appropriate to say mental diarrhea.