Catholicism or Protestantism? (Pro-Protestant, Con-Catholic)

I extend my thanks to my opponent, as well, for a very civil and engaging debate. In the last round I gave my arguments as to why Catholicism follows the Bible more correctly. My opponent then attempted to refute my assertions. A method of which I will return the favor. My opponent’s assertions can be summed up as such: Since Catholics define the pope as the highest religious authority in the world, they do not follow the teachings of the Bible. Since Protestants do not place such authority in papacy, they follow the Bible more properly. This is erroneous for two reasons. 1.) There are also religious leaders of supreme primacy over Protestant churches. 2.) As Protestants view pastors as an instrument for God, so do Catholics in regards to the Pope. Point 1: While Protestants may not have a universal figure of authority within their religion, they still place undue trust in their official leaders. For example, The United Methodist Church (the largest Protestant denomination) places undue trust in their bishops, council members, and members of the General Conference (Who literally speaks for all Methodist Churches). Hence, if my opponent argues that placing undue trust in leaders of the church violates the Bible, protestants much also be held accountable for this. Point 2: My opponent describes Pastors as “a part of the body, chosen by God to deliver His word to the believers.” The same definition can be given to the Pope. Catholics do not recognize the Pope as un-sinful or universally correct. In fact, often times Catholics question a Pope’s decision. My opponent erroneously stated “However, in Protestantism, the leaders are not thought of as having infallibility while assuming office.” Protestants are not the only ones questioning their leaders’ infallibility. In fact, whenever politics is concerned, questioning of leadership is guaranteed. Because of this, Protestantism makes the same mistakes Catholicism does. Finally, I’d like to refute a few choice quotes from my opponent: 1. “In Protestantism, one preacher's teachings do not represent the religion, and believers are aware of this.” Yet again the same can be said for Catholicism. My opponent has made the mistake to assume that Catholics are unquestioning when it comes to the Pope. 2. “Before I end my argument, I would like to clarify one thing: by Protestantism I do not mean certain cults, such as Mormons, Jehovah's Witness, etc. These churches have deviated from the teachings of Christ, and are not considered true Christians.” If my opponent is arguing for Protestantism, he should be fully inclusive. Unless he provides official evidence that Mormons et. all are not considered to be true Christians, he must be prepared to argue on their behalf. 3. “It is true that Protestants don't see all sins as equal.” My opponent has conceded that my point is right. While he goes onto explain additional beliefs, he does concede that Protestantism violates that specific teaching of the Bible. 4. “It is true that we must worship God every day. However, going to church is one way of worshiping him. Protestants worship God in our daily lives.” The same can be said for Catholics. With my rebuttals complete, I turn the argument over to my opponent for the final round! Good Luck!