Through the many uses of the word "idle-, the authors embodied the true capitalist Puritan work ethic of the day. This petition stated that "the said [Church] government, with all its dependencies, roots and branches, may be abolished."" Upon first look, this document strove to rid the Church of any sort of popery through demanding a more stringent look at the doctrine of predestination and free grace. The true purpose of this appeal, however, did not involve reaffirming religion, but instead strengthening Puritan capitalism. In article 22, these Puritans criticize the "observation of the saints' days- stating those "who getting their living on their daily employments, must either omit them, and be idle, or part with their money."" In the conclusion of this petition, these Puritans sought capitalistic gain as they spoke of the devaluing of English wool. "Wool, the great staple of the kingdom, is becoming small value, and vends not; trading is decaying and the whole land is much impoverished, to the great dishonour of this kingdom and blemishment to the government thereof."" Therefore, the Root and Branch Petition advocated capitalism over religion. Overall, both Charles and the Puritans undermined the institution of religion in return for monetary gain. .
A second disagreement lay between Charles I and Parliament's struggle for political power. A political document, the Nineteen Propositions of 1642 included religious demands as well in order to strengthen the claim of Parliament. These religious clauses dealing with enforcing the laws against "Jesuits, priests, and Popish recusants- merely reaffirmed what had already been implemented throughout Britain. For instance, English Protestants criticized "popery- since the days of Henry VIII. Secondly, the document stated that "a reformation be made of the Church government and liturgy, as both Houses of Parliament shall advise."" Therefore, Parliament did not demand a change in England's religious stance, but instead insisted that they had the power to do so.