You guys are the Sola Scriptura guys, not us.
We can say the same Sacred Tradition which looks at the totality of evidence on the Eucharist and concludes that Jesus meant it also tells us that the extreme language of this saying was rhetorical hyperbole.
Your side despises tradition in comparison with the Scriptures. I think it's your side that has the 'splainin' to do. I don't see a whole lot of self-mutilated Sola Scriptura types out there either.
Not only that, would be rather difficult for us to literally eat His flesh, since He was resurrected and lives today.
This whole conversation would be a lot less tedious if our opponents (a) didn't treat us like illiterate boobs and (b) maybe read a little Aquinas on the subject before they fired their pop guns at us.
Do you really think that we do not believe that Jesus was resurrected and lives today? Do you really think that our teaching on the substantial presence of Christ in the Eucharistic species has not considered the fundamental proclamation of the faith, that Christ is raised from the dead?
I have a feeling that a great many anti-Catholics really do think this is what Catholics believe.