FACT ONE: You have a lot of history misrepresented--Henry VIII was forced into marriage by his nobility to his dead brother's wife (Catherine) at 19 years old...yes, he was an adulterous king (later marrying the very pregnant Anne Boyelyn) but he is also regarded as one of the strongest monarch in English history--setting the beginning of the British Empire.
FACT TWO: There is a tremendous historical error regarding Catholicism and priestly celibacy--because it was not a condition of the Church until after the 10th Century. In fact, two popes fathered two sons who succeeded them on the throne of Peter and ALL FOUR TODAY are regarded as saints by YOUR church and also by mine! Celibacy, IMHO, should be confined to the monasteries and convents (where it is in the Episcopal church) but have no place in the priesthood where things such as marriage counseling often comes up. FACT THREE: I know of no lesbians being considered for bishop in my church...however, I also know of no New Testament scripture prohibiting such; the ordination of women, IMHO, is scripturally sound based upon the APOSTLE Mary Magdaline role with Christ!
There is also contemporary evidence in The History of the Anglican Schism (by Nicholas Sandler) during the reign of Henry's illegitimate daughter/grandaughter (his family relationships are so confusing that one can probably prove as in the old song that Henry was his own grandpa) that Anne Boleyn was Henry's illegitimate daughter. England, as you are no doubt aware, is nearly faithless today and Catholic Church attendance (3% of the English are Catholic) well outsrips Anglican attendance, even though Catholicism there is no better than here.
BTW, do you have any apostolic equivalents of your Bishop of Durham whose cathedral was struck by lightning and burned within a few weeks of his solemn pronouncement that Jesus Christ was and is not God. When did St. Mary Magdelen say Mass or hear confessions? I think you will have to do better than asserting that two anonymous pope/saints fathered two other anonymous pope/saints if you expect to be taken seriously. This may well have happened but, if it did, it does not necessarily imply what you imagine. Pious widower popes, ordained as late vocations, having previously fathered their offspring, who were ordained and became popes, as well? I note that, if your church regards them as saints (do you recognize Cranmer, as well?) you must not think too poorly of them, although, if my Church did not also regard them as saints, I would be very skeptical of their disposition after death.
Certainly no one will claim that primogeniture (with the attendant probability of having to put up with rank idiots as monarchs with some regularity Lizzie I and II, George III come immediately to mind) is the normal rule for succession to the papacy as it is in the curiously (but necessary to Henry) erected claim that the monarch of England is the head of its Church. No one has ever fried eggs on Lizzie II's forehead or been able to do so.
Maybe you can explain another historical question about Anglicanism or Episcopalianism as it is known on this side of the pond. If the head of state is the head of the church, does this mean that the Arkansas Antichrist was, for eight years, head of your church here? That would explain much. Inquiring minds want to know.
Your Scriptural basis for Mary Magdelen as an Apostle (priest/bishop) rather than as a disciple (every Tom, Dick and Harriet).
BTW, although I am as English by blood as I am Irish, I confess major sympathy for Ireland in all controversies with perfidious Albion. You may also wish to give your rationalizations for the rape, loot and pillage of Church property by Henry VIII prior to his death from syphilis (what else) in order to enrich his friends, buy off his nobles and further his illicit amorous ambitions. Or the martyrdom of St. Thomas More? Or the martyrdom of St. John Fisher? Or the martyrdom of St. Edmund Campion?
Other authors whom I would recommend would include an early 19th Century Protestant Member of Parliament Thomas Cobbett, and his magnificent work on the The History of the (misnamed) "Reformation" in England and Ireland (reformed nothing and constituted grand theft ecclesiastical) in which he accuses Henry of being responsible for looting Church hospitals, schools, churches and other property, thereby impoverishing the Roman Catholic Church in his unfortunate land and making it impossible for the Church (the actual Church not Henry's self-serving fantasy) to continue to provide medical care and education to the common people of England as previously without charge and thereby occasioning the beginning of taxation of ordinary folk as we know it. You would also do well to study John Henry Cardinal Newman, Belloc and Chesterton.
Chesterton wisely observed that many believe that those who reject the Truth will believe in nothing but that they were wrong. Actually, those who reject the Truth will believe anything. Your rendition of Henry's history is certainly proof of Chesterton's wisdom.
Do I remember correctly that the United States of America was the result of a revolution overthrowing the power of the then "head" of your Church in America?
One hundred years ago, your church, along with the rest of Christianity regarded divorce, homosexuality, abortion, and birth control as abominations. Your Lambeth Conference of 1930 opened the floodgates on divorce and remarriage and birth control. The rest of the results are now obvious. What do you expect of moral doctrine determined democratically?
Feel free to contact Fr. Carleton Jones, the Dominican and now Catholic pastor of St. Mary's Church in New Haven. He is the former pastor of St. Luke's Episcopal Church in New Haven. He is also a direct descendant of the justifiably famed Jonathan Edwards. Fr. Jones is a graduate of Yale University and of Berkeley Divinity School (not in California) which has since merged with Yale Divinity School. As an Episcopalian priest, Fr. Jones was troubled by the "morality" of the Episcopalian Church. Doctrinal approval of divorce and remarriage, birth control, homosexuality, women priests, and abortion had become hallmarks of Episcopalianism. According to an interview in the New Haven Register shortly after he returned to New Haven as a Catholic priest after resigning St. Luke's whose people he loved, Fr. Jones explained that he had gone to a Benedictine retreat house and prayed and pondered the fact that the Episcopalian Church had now proven beyond doubt that it is surely not the Church of Jesus Christ and so he became a Catholic priest. Welcome home, Father Jones.
Of course, even Parliament was so traumatized by Henry's philandering ways that, with his body not cold in the grave, within days of his death, the Parliament passed legislation secularly prohibiting divorce and remarriage and also prohibiting anyone from the throne who is divorced or married to one who is divorced (see Edward VIII who abdicated to marry American divorcee Wallis Warfield Simpson, thus giving up his undoubted brtilliance in the religious firmament for the woman he loved, as the saying goes, and the current reluctance of Prince Charles to marry the divorced Rotweiler).
Stalin was one of the strongest rulers in Russian history and Mao in Chinese history and Hitler in German history which absolves none of them of their crimes either. Henry married Catherine, the ostensible widow of his dead brother Arthur who NEVER consummated that marriage and never "sealed" it therefore under Canon Law, such was the argument of Henry VIII as a 19 year-old and of his Catholic father who wanted to facilitate dynastic interests by marrying a son to the daughter of the Spanish monarchs. Henry, not the nobles and not his father said "I do" and he previously petitioned th Vatican for annulment of his dead brother's marriage to Catherine of Aragon on exactly the grounds stated. Later in life after more than twenty years of marriage and, as, in the natural order of things, Catherine's fertility was drawing to a close without providing his imperial egotism with a male heir (probably God had more to do with this result than Catherine), he belatedly discovered an unnecessary and unseemly scrupulosity over what he now claimed had been an invalid marriage. This was analogous to your purchase of a new automobile, driving it for 2.5 million miles (driving many other cars secretly on the side, wink, wink) and then deciding you want your money back for the full purchase price plus interest, with a straight face. Except that Catherine was a woman and his wife and not a mere car.
I only mention these matters because of your insistence that the governance of the Roman Catholic Church is somehow your business although you cannot credibly claim membership in it. In that event, then the history and governance of your church are fair game.
Fully conceding that government has every right (and even duty) to prosecute and punish the perverts in the priesthood and their protective bishops and pervert bishops according to the laws enacted in the relevant jurisdictions and consistent with the constitution, and, in fact, encouraging the government to do exactly that (since it will facilitate the return of badly needed Catholicism to America), it is none of the government's business or yours to stick its or your uninvited nose into internal CHURCH decisions. Says so right in the First Amendment, adopted right after we booted the king or church leader or whaever George III was in addition to being insane. MYOB.