Berengar rejected transubstantion for a number of reasons and advocated a dynamic Presence. However, the church authorities forced him to recant. Had he had moral courage and stood against the intimidation of the Pope and all, the Church would have at least accepted that there is a legitimate alternative to transubstantion, along the lines that between Molinism and Thomism, the Church allows a Catholic to hold either position: a plurality of belief would be acceptable. One could argue that that should have been the outcome with Berengar, that Catholics should be allowed a range of beliefs on what happens in the Eucharist.
Anyway that somewhat sloppily summarizes Schaff’s shot at the supervisors of the Church, to attack with assonance. The charge then is twofold: one, that the alternative viewpoint was legitimate, and second that it was crushed in favor of transubstantiation in an unChristian manner. Intolerance and suppression, in other words, at play in an official capacity.
What is the Catholic response to this?