The unholy Anglicans who founded the Church of England rejected the true Eucharist to fulfill the worldly wishes of an insane and evil king.
Again, I'm not trying to be uncharitable, but it seems that simply stating the truth causes me to appear as such. Maybe someone else can impart this better than I.
Are you trying to be imbecilic?
Oh, I don't mean to sound harsh, but I call's 'em like I see's 'em.
While you are being uncharitable, you are moreso demonstrating an erroneous view of history and a weak understanding of the power of God.
Henry VIII certainly removed the English Catholic Church from the Roman branch of the Church. However, he returned it to its prior affiliation with Orthodoxy that was the original affiliation of English Christianity....the Celtic Church of Patrick, Columba, Aiden.
Also, the power of God is not dependent on any king; it is first dependent upon the Holy Spirit who does work through any of his faithful ministers....of which there were many in Henry VIII's day.
Just to put a finer point on what xzins said, you should also be educated to the fact that the Church of England was RETURNED to Roman Catholicism under Queen Mary and did not separate again until Elizabeth I (and not because she wanted a divorce). It is simplistic to say that the Church of England came to be because Henry VIII wanted a divorce. At issue was the "divine right of kings" and Henry's assertion that his kingship was divinely given and, therefore, he answered directly to God - not to a Pope. We'll save THAT theological debate for another time.
Now - to your denigration of every other Christian's practice of the Eucharistic Feast as somehow sacreligious, I must tell you that you are not only uncharitable in saying so, you are also offensive and ignorant. I reprint Articles XXVII and XXX from the Protestant Episcopal Church in the US Articles of Religion written in 1801 (which is a statement of what most Anglicans [worldwide] believe and why).
Article XXVII Of the Lord's Supper:
The Supper of the Lord is not only a sign of the love that Christians ought to have among themselves one to another; but rather it is a Sacrament of our Redemption by Christ's death; insomuch that to such as rightly, worthily, and with faith, receive the same, the Bread which we break is a partaking of the Body of Christ; and likewise the Cup of Blessing is the Blood of Christ.
Transubstantiation (or the change of the substance of Bread and Wine) in the Supper of the Lord, cannot be proved by Holy Writ; but is repugnant to the plain words of Scripture, overthroweth the nature of a Sacrament, and have given occasion to many superstitions.
The Body of Christ is given, taken, and eaten, in the Supper, only after an heavenly and spiritual manner. And the mean whereby the Body of Christ is received and eaten in the Supper, is Faith.
The Sacrament of the Lord's Supper was not by Christ's ordination reserved, carried about, lifted up, or worshipped.
Article XXX Of Both Kinds:
The Cup of the Lord is not to be denied to the Lay-people; for both the parts of the Lord's Sacrament, by Christ's ordinance and commandment, ought to be ministered to all Christian men alike. (As you know, Roman Catholic laypeople do not partake of the Lord's Cup)
When I partake of the Eucharist, I BELIEVE that I am doing all that Jesus commanded that I do. It's called Faith. You may think it's "unholy," but it doesn't matter what YOU think. The only thing that matters is what Jesus thinks. Scripture tells us that Jesus holds FAITH in high regard...to the womon who reached out to touch the hem of his robes he said, "your FAITH has healed you..." and to the leper he said, "your FAITH has made you whole." My justification is my FAITH in Jesus - not my church affiliation and the distinct practices therein.