Roman Catholicism was chosen by history to be superior to the teachings of Peter Waldes, 1140-1218 AD. Romanism placed more importance on the Pope. The Gospel taught by Jesus was later used by Protestant thinkers to assess both Waldensianism and Catholicism. This adventure allowed the Gospel to be a study in correctness regarding different religions.
Yet the language known as Franco-Roman provided intense personal meaning as to how to live the Gospel. The Franco language was doomed to decline in use in Europe. Thus the responsibility of each Christian to make the Gospel known was seen to transcend languages. In this sense the Gospel was evangelicalized.
If Waldensianism took the idea of the Resurrection and the idea that no man or woman can serve two masters as historical, and break off from Rome then Rome would respond with the Third Lateran Council, 1180 AD, to excommunicate the Waldensians.
Ruled out was critical assessment of orthodoxy in the Church. That conclusion sounds odd because history provides witness that change in the Church is a positive evolution in said Church instead of the incorrect logic that points to a break with said Church altogether. Thus the problem of Waldensian logic at the same time as it's being a known historical reality.