How does one counter the argument that religion is superstition?

[SonCatcher]

Do you think the bread actually becomes the body of Christ, or do you think it is “spiritual?”

The accidents (that which is observable to natural science) remain bread and wine. The Church never claims otherwise. The substance is a different matter (pun not intended). However, for “supernatural causality” to be present in the sense as it is defined one would have to see a difference in the accidents (that is, the observable).

I suppose, if one counts the various Eucharistic Miracles, one could regard “supernatural causality” there (something that appears to be bread now appears to be flesh without any physical connection). In that case, the skeptic is hard-pressed to develop a plausible counter-explanation.