A friend once had me consider this logic.
Because the Catholic Immaculate Conception doctrine is a cornerstone tenet of the church, but is essentially a dogmatic belief, any dogmatic doctrine canonized by the church must also be as worthy of faith as the Immaculate Conception doctrine.
However the doctrine of transfiguration is also a dogmatic belief. Yet even after a priest has blessed the sacramental wine and bread, in reality it does not literally transfigure into the blood and body of Christ even though the doctrine of transfiguration states that it does.
If the wine does not literally turn to blood, the doctrine of transfiguration is wrong and because the doctrine of transfiguration is equally as valid as the Immaculate Conception, it too is also wrong by association.
However, if the Christ were literally made of bread and wine, then all conflicts would be resolved. Can you please comment on this logic?