You're arguing about the word "transubstantiation." That is related to, but not identical to, the doctrine of the Lord's real Body and Blood being real food and real drink. (I say "not identical to" because the doctrine existed before the word.) A person does not have to speak Latin to accept the realism of the Eucharist. The essential thing is this:
Jesus: "This is My Body."
The believer: "Amen."
You're arguing about the word "transubstantiation." That is related to, but not identical to, the doctrine of the Lord's real Body and Blood being real food and real drink. (I say "not identical to" because the doctrine existed before the word.) A person does not have to speak Latin to accept the realism of the Eucharist. The essential thing is this: But that is the issue. Roman Catholicism teaches that somehow, someway, the bread and wine become the flesh and blood of Christ.
However, that is not supported by Scripture as previously demonstrated.
This stems from an incorrect understanding of John 6.
Jesus: "This is My Body."...do this in remembrance of Me.