Richard Dawkins is desperately excited to have discovered some poll saying that many Catholics in wherever do not believe in transubstantiation. Well, if such things were ever taught in Catholic schools, then they might.
And anyway, so what? What matters is that the Church teaches it. Catholics who dissent from the Teaching of the Church are just wrong, objectively speaking. That is all that there is to it. Only the Catholic Church provides such objectivity, which is perfectly encapsulated in transubstantiation.
It was only from Christianity in general, and from Catholicism in particular, that science acquired the idea that some propositions were just plain true, so that others were just plain false. And it was only from Christianity in general, and from Catholicism in particular, that science acquired the idea that the idea that there was an investigable order in the universe; even if that order is a law of chaos, then the point still stands.
Faced with a changed intellectual environment which denies those foundations rather than simply presupposing them, science must return to the system that first asserted them in the midst of a former such environment. That system is Christianity in general, and Catholicism in particular.
Thus, for example, while and by affirming the objective existence of the substance distinct from the accidents, transubstantiation also affirms the objective existence of the accidents, which are the objects of scientific investigation. Transubstantiation is the bulwark against the Postmodern assault on science. Nothing else is.
I should love to know what atheist philosophers such as A C Grayling really thought of Richard Dawkins. The amount of time that they must have to spend undoing the damage that he has done to the minds of those who arrive as their undergraduates.