I don't think you can bring the parallels of the reformation with democracy v/s monarchy
For instance note that Luther was pro-Princes against the rising of the serfs (and I state that without talking about his religious aspect at all) and Lutheranism was used pretty much until the Weimar Republic as a department of the state in German states and in the German Empire (in the German Empire this was accelerated by the Kaiser's forcing the union of the Calvinist and Lutheran Churchs thereby making this a fixed department of the state).
Also note that Calvinism attached itself to another state which was not quite democratic -- the Dutch. Of course theDutch were more democratic than France or Spain, but not quite USA levels. This also tied in to historical reasons -- the Dutch and Belgians were part of the Spanish Netherlands, separated from Spain by France and so pretty much independent unlike their compatriots in Spain or France
The truest republics until the time of American indepence were in Italy -- Genoa, Venica, etc. etc. because they were small.
Anyway, I diverge
After Luther there was no increase in personal liberties or rights in Europe. On the contrary, things went the other way -- after the 30 years war, serfdom was imposed in much of Germany and the French King became an autocrat.
The only country which had something resembling a democracy besides the small states of Italy was the Polish-Lithuania republic which elected its kings. That was NOT due to the Poles being Catholic, but to pragmatism in a multi-cultural state
Under Cromwell, Britain was not democratic, Cromwell forcibly dismissed parliament in 1653 and became dictator
Religious plurality disappeared under Cromwell in England, disappeared in France, never was there in Spain after 1492, not in Muscowy nor in Scandanavia and was not there in each individual German state
Religious plurality was to some extent there in the Italian states and in the Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth and surprisingly in much of Ottoman Europe it was there at times.
Presbyterianism aligned itself with the establishment. The Baptists, Unitarians etc. were the ones completely against the establishment
Right now I'm reading about Czarnagóra (Montenegro) -- now most of the people there consider themselves Serbs and speak Serbian, but due to being seperated for 600 years (due to the Turkish invasion), they are slowly separating. Ditto for the east slavs -- "russians" in the lower case are all east slavs: Ukrainians, Belarussians, "Russians" -- but they are no longer the same people and haven't been the same since Kievan Rus, before the Mongol invasions
=======
Secular humanism is a false religion. My belief is that mankind needs a religion, a belief, in something. If they don't have God, they will invent it (the television) or the state.
I went for a civil marriage in Poland recently and the civil marriage ceremony dates from communist times. The funny thing to me was that the words are EXACTLY the same as a Church wedding, only instead of pledging to God, you pledge to the State
it's a replacement of God by State
This is what Obama is doing, what the Bolsheviks did, what Bismarck's welfare state unwittingly did.
The USA was always a mixed religious state, whether we like it or not, but based on Judeo-Christian values that are common to us all except to Mormons (Polygamy) and Islam (well... duuuh)
We have seen the state creeping in our lifetime to taking over everything. and if we don't stop it this year, I strongly predict a third-world USA in 2020 (i.e. if we have Obama 2.0)....