You apparently presume that I was glad to read that survey result. I assure you I was not. That was why I remembered the essence of it.
I took undergraduate courses at the Catholic University of America from pontifically-licensed Catholic theologians
The same theologians who publicly dissented from Humanae Vitae and told American Catholics that they could, too? Um, OK.
"As I told patent, I don't have the citation at my fingertips for the survey that I read that said most Catholics today don't believe in the Real Presence. Since most Catholics today attend the New Mass, I think there is a direct relation."
You're missing the point. I've seen similar studies. I've also seen studies that indicate that 60+% of Catholics believe in the Real Presence. How to tell which is right?
I look at the methodology. That is, in part, what I went to school for. I have a basic understanding of social science methodology, and can make a pretty good determination of which of two methodologies ought to work better. The studies that indicate relatively low belief in the Real Presence, to my reasonably well-informed mind, are flawed. The studies that show a relatively higher belief in the Real Presence seem to have better methodology. As I explained in my last post. Which you haven't shown that you understand. Perhaps you didn't read it. I'm trying to give you the benefit of the doubt.
You are in error to think that a majority, even of self-identified Catholics, no less actual practicing Catholics, do not believe in the Real Presence.
Thus, your conclusion is incorrect.
As to the professors who taught me at the Catholic University of America, some were orthodox and some were not. But all were honest. If they believed what was not orthodox, they said, "Here is the teaching of the Church. Now here is what I believe." And they made it quite clear where they disagreed.
Of course, honesty isn't alway coincident with fairness. More than one professor gave me a less than stellar grade, in part because I dissented from their own personal views of what should be Church teaching.
But, of course, you've missed the point again. My point was that even with a Catholic education denied to most, the details of the doctrine of transubstantiation can be difficult to grasp, and after 20+ years, I'm sure that I'm quite hazy about some of the technical terms of the metaphysics. And thus, one might judge me heterodox if I fail to accurately remember the right answer to some aspect of the teaching.
That doesn't mean I don't believe in the Real Presence. So it is for Catholics with lesser educations.
sitetest