Catholicism vs. Protestantism, which do you consider more "democratic"?

What I mean is democratic compared to authoritarian, or which belief gives the most power to the common man.

Follow up question: Do you consider a more democratic interpretation better for Christianity? (Considering the fact that God's kingdom is by no means a democracy.)

Thanks for your answers, if you choose to share.

What is Protestantism? I don't believe it is mentioned in the bible!

the Church has no power, man and women have all the power.

The power to believe or not to believe.

The Catholic church has always excepted anyone and everyone, protestant churches are the most segregated institutions in the modern world.

Protestantism.

Duhhhh! Anything is better than Catholicism.

Teehee, how many thumbs down will I get?

I'm a Protestant Christian, and we are bound only by the scripture and what it tells us about Christ and his salvation for us. We are not subject to church tradition and canon laws, and we have no need for a religious leader (like the Pope) for example. Christ is the Head of our church, not man. The Catholic faith is bound with strict canon laws, and the bible seems to take second place to their traditions and fundamental beliefs. For the protestant Christians, the bible is our only source of God's word, for we believe that this is all that is needed, not traditions, rituals and man made laws.

Catholicism, they voted for which books should be in the bible and they voted for Jesus to be god or not.

(Roman) Catholicism is openly undemocratic.

Protestantism is surreptitiously undemocratic.

It's like the difference between Australia's Liberal and Labor parties or America's nearest equivalent - Republican and Democrat.


The ones who talk loudest about democracy are usually the least democratic ... it's like homophobia

for the first poster BEING BORN AGAIN IS MENTIONED...catholics dint corner the MT...

church is not political thank GOD!!

No chucked can be run in a democratic manner. However, the Catholic Church does allow its non-clerical members to participate in a wide range of ministries and to hold a wide range of authoritative positions. And perhaps more important, it allows ordained women to do EVERYTHING that ordained men can do.

There is no democracy prevalent in either. One has a head, the Pope, and the other has a head, God or Jesus. They both tell you how to act. No democracy there. Protestantism does allow for voting out of a leader and choosing who replaces it. But in the grand scheme doesn't make much difference.

I think a democratic interpretation is impossible when it comes to a major religion. The structures upon which they are built preclude any democracy.

1st my version of the story is the Protestant's broke away from Catholic's because they were to strict(look up Protestant revolution 1600's)), i do understand the ones in America have become UN control ably strict(something I'm against) and anyways it doesn't matter we are the same and there are the strict and open on both side's :/ and your attempt at creating a rift was bad :/

The Catholic Church murdered millions including "Protestants".

hahahahahaha. ask the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops who are cursing the laity for supporting Obamacare.

Untempered democracy is tyranny of the majority. The United States Constitution establishes principles and sets up mechanisms to protect minorities. Many people are complaining today about the courts overturning the California gay-marriage ban as a blow against democracy. It is; tyranny of the majority is wrong.

Similarly, a dialog between laity and hierarchy should underlie the selection of pastors and bishops. We need not have campaigns and voting for Bishops, but input from active lay people or a choice of three candidates is superior to appointment by Rome and is still not as bad as selection of Bishops by national governments as in China.

Democracy works best in a smaller group that is homogenous. This is the case for small Protestant congregations and becomes less so for major Protestant denominations.

Protestant is more democratic

Protestantism.

Catholicism is authoritarian and tyrannical......A closed minded elitism.

Protestantism is democratic and accepting of everyone as well as being actual Christianity.

I'd say Protestantism may seem more democratic..but is it really "majority rules" ? I'd say its more "every man for himself" in how they develop their doctrines.

It definitely gives more "power to the people"


You asked the right question, though, is that better for Christianity?


IF we agree that Religion should be about TRUTH. And that if there is a God..then there is only 1 truth, Right?


In that case.. it is a serious question to say... "is personal interpretation and democracy the best way to keep and spread the truth?"

Anotherwards, is "power to the people" and more then one interpretation with out any central authority lead to truth or confusion?

Is it best for Christianity?

That's a debate that has been ranging for a while.
Protestants berate Catholic Magestrium
Catholics berate all the variations and disorganization amongst Protestants.


If there is only 1 truth.. should we pursue ideologies and doctrines which promote many truths and no central authority?


Protestants may claim that the bible and Christ are their central authority.. something that Catholics also claim. But in the Protestant philosophy.. it is up to individuals to figure out WHAT it is that the bible or Christ is telling them. Whatever conclusion they come to.. is what the TRUTH means to them.
This can often times lead either to subjectives OR extremism.

Protestant street missionary said to me
"Hey come to our church! It's awesome BLAHBLAHBLAH"
me.. "Um... I'm Catholic"
"Oh please come once and see the light of Jesus!"
me." No thanks"
"You have too! in order to go to heaven! catholics and others go to HELL!"
me thinking 'what the....'
forcing people to go to churches on the streets isn't exactly what i call democratic.. --'