Of, relating to, being, or imposing a form of government in which the political authority exercises absolute and centralized control over all aspects of life, the individual is subordinated to the state, and opposing political and cultural expression is suppressed.Some denominations are decentralized in the sense that they don't have popes or bishops declaring what they should believe, but they consider The Bible their centralized authority (not necessarily God). The individual is subordinated to the cluster of beliefs they're required to believe, and woe to anybody who breaks the rules! There are some of these churches around here and it's been an eye-opener for me.
The women won't cut their hair or wear pants, the kids can't watch TV, nobody is allowed to wear jewelry, they spend hours and hours in church every Sunday and more hours on other days, they're not allowed to marry outside of their denomination.... And there are the Mormons, who wear magic underwear, can't drink coffee or booze, and forbid the women from wearing pants.
None of these silly rules can possibly make someone a better "Christian," just a more obedient one. One of my coworkers who went to a religious school pointed out that some of those "rules" are based on Paul's letters to people in cities that had very specific problems. I can't remember the particulars but it had to do with not wearing the same kind of outfits that prostitutes wear in that locality. Not dressing like a prostitute is pretty good advice for all women who don't want to be mistaken for prostitutes. Not dressing like a first-century prostitute in the Middle East, uhhhh
Indiana also has Amish & Mennonites, who are kind of the Wahabists of Christianity. They look like they stepped out of the 1850s.
What I find crazy is that they think this totalitarianism is a good thing. If Papal totalitarianism is bad, and Hitler's totalitarianism was bad, and Stalin's totalitarianism was bad, how can they justify this form?