Liberals don't study

I don't understand. Liberals don't accept the authoritarian method, but I don't see how it follows that they don't study or pay any attention to church history, scrïpture, historical theology, etc.

The exercise is optional to the liberal, that's why. Matters such as the decisions of the ecumenical councils, the witness of the early church fathers and the testimonies of tradition are contradictory to liberal principles when taken at face value. As such, they don't affect liberalism in any concrete manner when studied, and in most cases, these matters become irrelevant when the authority associated with them is stripped. For example, it is of little consequence that tradition declares that Acts was written by Luke; for the liberals, their alternative methods are more relevant and trustworthy.