Wow.
So you just act as if it's all over? There would be no Church of England were it not for Henry--the C of E owes its existence to this monster. So how can the good bishop repudiate the monster without repudiating the church he created? It's still a state church.
Nor did Henry act alone. How can the C of E bishop denounce Henry without at the same time asking serious questions about Thomas Cranmer the Co-dependent Enabler and the very origins of Anglicanism? I don't get it. If at some point Anglicans changed their minds and decided to repudiate Henry, on what basis do they justify their continued existence?
John Houghton is my confirmation patron saint. He died because the bishops backed Henry. Good men did nothing. Yes, had they resisted him, they too might have died this way. But by refusing to resist him, they enabled the revolution that created the first state churches in Western Europe. Henry could not have made his power grab without the blessing of religious leaders like Cranmer. St. John Houghton's blood is on their heads too. Blaming it all on Henry is the way a 14-year-old acts when caught red-handed: it's all his fault.