What I find a little shocking is that Bryan and Katherine would be up in arms about him taking a vow of poverty when they claim the spiritual heritage of the Waldensians, who did the exact same thing...
WRONG! The vow of poverty didn't start until the 6th century with the Roman Catholic church!
In the western church
Since the 6th century, monks and nuns following the Rule of Saint Benedict have been making the so-called Benedictine vow at their public profession of obedience (placing oneself under the direction of the abbot/abbess or prior/prioress), stability (committing oneself to a particular monastery), and "conversion of manners" (which includes forgoing private ownership and celibate chastity).[3]
During the 12th and 13th centuries mendicant orders emerged, such as the Franciscans and Dominicans, whose vocation emphasizing mobility and flexibility required them to drop the concept of "stability". They therefore profess chastity, poverty and obedience, like the members of many other orders and religious congregations founded subsequently. The public profession of these so-called Evangelical counsels (or counsels of perfection), confirmed by vow or other sacred bond, are now a requirement according to modern Church Law.[4]
The "clerks regular" of the 16th century and after, such as the Jesuits and Redemptorists, followed this same general format, though some added a "fourth vow", indicating some special apostolate or attitude within the order.
Fully professed Jesuits (known as "the professed of the fourth vow" within the order), take a vow of particular obedience to the Pope to undertake any mission laid out in their Formula of the Institute. The Missionaries of Charity, founded by Mother Teresa centuries later (1940s), are another example of this, in that her sisters take a fourth vow of special service to "the poorest of the poor".The Waldezians and the Baptists didn't exactly have a "heirarchy" (which is unbiblical itself).
In the Roman Catholic Church
In the Roman Catholic Church, the vows of members of religious orders and congregations are regulated by canons 654-658 of the Code of Canon Law. These are public vows, meaning vows accepted by a superior in the name of the Church,[5] and are usually of two durations: temporary, and, after a few years, final vows (permanent or "perpetual"). Depending on the order, temporary vows may be renewed a number of times before permission to take final vows is given. There are exceptions: the Jesuits' first vows are perpetual, for instance, and the Sisters of Charity take only temporary but renewable vows.Religious vows are of two varieties: simple vows and solemn vows. The highest level of commitment is exemplified by those who have taken their solemn, perpetual vows. There once were significant technical differences between them in canon law; but these differences were suppressed by the current Code of Canon Law in 1983, although the nominal distinction is maintained. Only a limited number of religious congregations may invite their members to solemn vows; most religious congregations are only authorized to take simple vows. Even in congregations with solemn vows, some members with perpetual vows may have taken them simply rather than solemnly.
A perpetual vow can be superseded by the Pope, when he decides that a man under perpetual vows should become a Bishop of the Church. In these cases, the ties to the order the new Bishop had, are dissolved as if the Bishop had never been a member; hence, such a person as, e.g., Pope Francis has had no formal ties to his old order for years. However, if the Bishop was a member in good standing, he will be regarded, informally, as "one of us", and he will always be welcome in any of the order's houses.
There are other forms of consecrated life in the Catholic Church for men and women.
They make a public profession of the evangelical counsels of chastity, poverty, and obedience, confirmed by a vow or other sacred bond, regulated by canon law but live consecrated lives in the world (i.e. not as members of a religious institute). Such are the secular institutes, the hermits and the consecrated virgins (canon 604) These make a public profession of the evangelical counsels by a vow or other sacred bond. Also similar are the societies of apostolic life.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_vowsAnd his big tie-up on the word "ecumenical" is a little confusing as well. It's the Conspirianity "buzzword culture" at work. Ecumenical simply means "representing a number of different Christian churches". Conspiracy minded Christians have taken the word and made it a buzzword for "one world religion". Creation teaching crosses denominational lines. Now Kent Hovind has his own procession of problems (he's just as conspiratorial as anyone, he unlawfully divorced his wife, Steven Anderson, etc.) but this particular accusation from Bryan is completely ridiculous.
WRONG again! These so-called "Protestant" churches like the Lutheran church support INFANT BAPTISM! Why? B/c that's how they get CONTROL. Calvin also supported it, and the Church of Christ believes in baptismal regeneration (which is a doctrine of works). The Protestant churches aren't called the daughters of the **** of Babylon for nothing. Luther's main intention was to "reform" the Catholic church, otherwise he and the other "reformers" like Calvin brought in Catholic leaven.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infant_baptism#Lutheranshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infant_baptism#Methodist_churcheshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infant_baptism#Presbyterian.2C_Congregational_and_Reformed_churches
