You wrote:
“If Henry VIII was a Reformer Benny Hinn is the next pope.”
Then get ready for Benny Hinn’s papal election. Henry VIII indeed was a “Reformer”.
1) Through Cranmer he introduced the Exhortation and Litany, which was the first English only service manual ever. It’s Protestant character was unmistakeable. It weakened the place of the communion of saints, for instance. It was published in 1544 and relied heavily upon Martin Luther’s own service books and, if I am not mistaken, Miles Coverdale’s Bible translation.
In addition to changing the rituals of the Church and making them increasingly Protestant, Henry VIII robbed and closed over 2,000 chapels, monasteries, convents, hospitals, colleges, chantries, and orphanages.
So, he changed the Catholic rituals, attacked doctrine thereby, robbed the Church, murdered those monks and clerics who opposed him, etc. Yep, he was a “Reformer”.
“BTW, how how many Popes had children?”
A bunch.
“I assume John The Baptist would wink at that?”
No. But John the Baptist also never said Judaism was false just because the Pharisees were hypocrites either. He would extend the same reasoning to Christianity at the very least don’t you think?
In the end the "defender of the faith" didn't really change that much:
Meanwhile, Henry, though taking advantage of the spirit of religious innovation now rife among the people whenever it suited his purpose, remained still attached to the sacramental system in which he had been brought up. In 1539 the Statute of the Six Articles enforced, under the severest penalties, such doctrines as transubstantiation, Communion under one kind, auricular confession, and the celibacy of the clergy. Under this act offenders were sent to the stake for their Protestantism just as ruthlessly as the aged Margaret, Countess of Salisbury, was attainted by Parliament and eventually beheaded, simply because Henry was irritated by the denunciations of her son Cardinal Pole. Neither was the king less cruel towards those who were nearest to him. Anne Boleyn and Catherine Howard, his second and fifth wives, perished on the scaffold, but their whilom lord only paraded his indifference regarding the fate to which he had condemned them. On 30 July, 1540, of six victims who were dragged to Smithfield, three were Reformers burnt for heretical doctrine, and the other three Catholics, hanged and quartered for denying the king's supremacy. Of all the numerous miserable beings whom Henry sent to execution, Cromwell, perhaps, is the only one who fully deserved his fate. Looking at the last fifteen years of Henry's life, it is hard to find one single feature which does not evoke repulsion, and the attempts made by some writers to whitewash his misdeeds only give proof of the extraordinary prejudice with which they approach the subject. Henry's cruelties continued to the last, and so likewise did his inconsistencies. One of the last measures of confiscation of his reign was an act of suppression of chantries, but Henry by his last will and testament established what were practically chantries to have Masses said for his own soul.
His correct answer was -- it shouldn't be.