I don’t quite agree with your assessment. Your observation is certainly true initially, but not ultimately. When a Protestant converts to Catholicism, that person takes with him a rich heritage of biblical knowledge. Hence, your observation that he seems to be "well-versed." The opposite is also true. Since Roman Catholicism does not emphasis individual study of the Scriptures, Roman Catholics who finally discover the truth of the Gospel and convert to Evangelicalism are often both poorly educated in the Scriptures and resentful that Rome had mislead them so badly (this was my own personal experience as well—I actually wanted to sue the Roman Catholic church for keeping me from the Gospel for so many years, and for filling my head with so many errors).

Having said all that, neither of these scenarios lasts long. The Roman convert to Evangelicalism is soon educated in the Scriptures and becomes a thinking, savvy apologist for the truth, while the Protestant convert to Rome ultimately must spend the rest of his time thinking of new ways to explain why his newly found faith really doesn’t contradict the clear teaching of the Bible, even though it seems to. In other words, he must let Rome do all the final analysis on the meaning of Scripture, and he is obligated to defend that final analysis—even when it completely overturns the Scriptures. He is simply not allowed to come to conclusions on his own, for that would constitute "private judgment"—something not allowed by Rome. Of course, this is no different than what Jehovah’s Witnesses and Mormons must do in regard to the errors of their organizations.

E.S.