balance too much the other way. Both sides claimed they were seeking to restore the "ancient constitution"; for many Parliamentarians, Stuart concepts of Divine right of kings and absolutism brought in by James VI and I in 1603 were "innovations" that had undermined traditional English political and legal principles. This helps explain the internal tensions that developed within Parliament as the war progressed, since not everyone agreed on what they were seeking to restore or even if it were desirable. Most Parliamentarians went to war in 1642 to regulate the king's powers, rather than depose him; John Pym, their leader in the Commons, was one of the few to recognise it might be the only option, since past experience showed Charles would not keep commitments he considered forced on him. Examples included his annulment of the 1628 Petition of Right, and the recent Bishops Wars, when he agreed peace terms with the Scots in 1639 only to provide time for another attempt in 1640. These doubts were confirmed when he and his wife Henrietta Maria repeatedly told foreign ambassadors any concessions made to Parliament were temporary, and would be retrieved by force. The personality and credibility of the king mattered, because regardless of religion or political belief, the vast majority in all three kingdoms believed a 'well-ordered' monarchy was divinely mandated. His opponents argued that if Charles would not obey his own laws or keep his promises, his refusal presented a threat to the state which required military intervention to either force him to do so, or depose him in favour of his eldest son. Where they disagreed was what 'well-ordered' meant and who held ultimate authority, especially in clerical affairs; this mattered, because in the 17th century 'true religion' and 'good government' were assumed to be the same. In general, Royalists supported a Church of England governed by bishops, appointed by, and answerable to, the king, while most Parliamentarians believed he was answerable to the leaders of the church, appointed by their congregations. A common misperception is that "Roundhead" was interchangeable with "Puritan". In reality, this term applied to anyone who wanted to "purify" the Church of England of "Papist" practices, and covered a wide range of views. Although the majority supported Parliament, some prominent Puritans like Sir William Savile backed Charles out of personal loyalty. Conversely, many Royalists objected to Laudianism, and opposed the appointment of Catholics to