I would suggest that your sources are the ones taking too much credit for the acts of the British Christians.
In my mind form follows function, function follows form.
No body else built the legal framework, the legal infrastructure or progress beyond what the brits did.
Brits created the Magna Carta, 150 years later, after they learned they could buy and sell their lands, they learned they could do the same with ideas.
Again, they were leaders in this too. Global leaders.
I am sure that advanced blue banana thinkers would have participated in the changing ideas of Britain as the Brits were using the ideas in their patents and patent registry.
I am sure of the that those advanced ideas would spread down the pathway to Romes doorstep as did the tax dollars from the outset... and they probably did not like the changes blowing their way.
I am also convinced that Rome had nothing to do with the Magna Carta of Britain, the patent and copyright laws of Britain, nor the building blocks leading into the industrial revolution of Great Britain. It was a process, a 800 year process. Given that, you do not see the achievements of Rome in her children of South America...
They too referred to the free industrialized west...as a removed, independent party, now catholic versus protestant. Given this, I would have to say that Catholicism was the barnacle on the progressive Anglicans hull.
All in all it was a Christina experience. NOT an Indian, Not an African, not a mooooooslim.... not a tribal/ communal experience as that is what they evolved from.
The Magna Carta is hardly unique.
The rights of Danish kings were bound by nobility right from the beginning, Polish kings were elected by the nobility, then there is the Pacta conventa between the Hungarian royalty and the Croatian nobility, etc.
The Magna Carta sounds unique because you may not have heard of the others
Then the entire banking system was created by Italians.