Why do you insist that you’re right, when you’re merely pulling things either out of your ass, or out of the ass-licking fake historians loyal to the Tudors?
Had Henry continued to murder Reformed Christians, had Henry allowed his little pet Chancellor [a "saint" who tortured Christians under his own roof] or if just his daughter Mary had been allowed to continue to burn Apostates of the heretical Roman "church," you Romanists would be -- your inspired and scholarly choice of words -- licking Tudor asses from now until Kingdom come.
I have little doubt that you believe the laughable claims that Elizabeth Woodville "bewitched" Edward, as the nullified Titulus Regius claims. But those who actually know history, as opposed to falsify it behalf of the Pope, knew at the time that an "act" of Parliament passed under threat of murder by the occupying army of a usurper was hogwash.
But what I don't understand is why defend this despicably vile traitor just because he was a Papist? After all, the Tudor claims are simply invalid because of the Donation of Constantine.
Bwahahahahahaha!
[In case you're unaware of the joke, The Donation of Constantine is a Romanist lie as well.]
Rome lost England because the declining fortunes of the Plantagenet dynasty led the Pope to believe his continental alliances were more important than anything else. He was wrong. In two generations, the Tudors restored England as a great power and destroyed the stooges of the Inquisition.
You lost.
Get over it.