The reason of this stand of his is that, for him, there can be no two sides to a question which for him is settled; for him, there is no seeking after the truth:  he possesses it in its fulness, as far as God and religion are concerned.  His Church gives him all there is to be had; all else is counterfeit.  And if he believes, as he should and does believe, that revealed truth comes, and can come, only by way of external authority, and not by way of private judgment and investigation, he must refuse to be liberal in the sense of reading all sorts of Protestant controversial literature and listening to all kinds of heretical sermons.  If he does not this, he is false to his principles; he contradicts himself by accepting and not accepting an infallible Church; he knocks his religious props from under himself and stands—­ nowhere.  The attitude of the Catholic, therefore, is logical and necessary.  Holding to Catholic principles how can he do otherwise?  How can he consistently seek after truth when he is convinced that he holds it?  Who else can teach him religious truth when he believes that an infallible Church gives him God’s word and interprets it in the true and only sense?

A Protestant may not assume this attitude or impose it upon those under his charge.  If he does so, he is out of harmony with his principles and denies the basic rule of his belief.  A Protestant believes in no infallible authority; he is an authority unto himself, which authority he does not claim to be infallible, if he is sober and sane.  He is after truth; and whatever he finds, and wherever he finds it, he subjects it to his own private judgment.  He is free to accept or reject, as he pleases.  He is not, cannot be, absolutely certain that what he holds is true; he thinks it is.  He may discover to-day that yesterday’s truths are not truths at all.  We are not here examining the soundness of this doctrine; but it does follow therefrom, sound or unsound, that he may consistently go where he likes to hear religious doctrine exposed and explained, he may listen to whomever has religious information to impart.  He not only may do it, but he is consistent only when he does.  It is his duty to seek after truth, to read and listen to controversial books and sermons.

If therefore a non-Catholic sincerely believes in private judgment, how can he consistently act like a Catholic who stands on a platform diametrically opposed to his, against which platform it is the very essence of his religion to protest?  How can he refuse to hear Catholic preaching and teaching, any more than Baptist, Methodist and Episcopalian doctrines?  He has no right to do so, unless he knows all the Catholic Church teaches, which case may be safely put down as one in ten million.  He may become a Catholic, or lose all the faith he has.  That is one of the risks he has to take, being a Protestant.