Did you grow up under the English education system? Under the National Curriculum, at least when I and many people younger than me went through, we cover the Tudors as a ‘topic’ in primary school, and then cover them again at least once in History lessons in secondary school.
When I did the Tudors in a Catholic primary school, the teacher (bless her) ensured that we learnt things like priest holes, and the Pilgrimage of Grace, and stories of congregations trying to preserve their churches from iconoclasts, and secret Masses, and so on. The narrative was very much that a small elite were imposing a change on the population, with force, and that the changes had little to do with what the main population actually believed at the time.
When we got to that bit in the History curriculum at my secondary school (not Catholic), the textbook seemed to be going with the narrative that ‘the people’ had been pushing for change, and that Henry VIII whole divorce thing just conveniently aligned with changes that everyone wanted anyway. It very briefly touched on priest holes (in that they exist), but none of the rest of it. Lots of Bloody Mary, Edward VI seemed to be less sickly and young with Protestant advisers in this account, and Hooray Elizabeth I for navigating a peaceful middle way (no mention of additional martyrs). Lots of stuff about corrupt monasteries, but to be fair we also learnt that Henry VIII was selling them off because he needed money, and that doing so removed a vital piece of support for many poor.
And my history teacher did have the grace to look embarrased by the account in the text book, at times, and gave me decent marks for my somewhat scathing essays. But it doesn’t change that if I had been relying on those lessons for my knowledge of the period, I would have got only that old-fashioned “Hooray for the Church of England” account. We also seemed to cover a topic in RS (Religious Studies) that I can only think was secretly headed “Why the Irish are pissed off with England”, which covered a certain amount of stuff mysteriously absent from our History lessons.
To this day, if you visit many ruined abbeys and monasteries, you will find the little information boards put up next to them tell you that the monasteries were corrupt and people complained, and so Henry VIiI kindly shut them down.
All history is a kind of storytelling, and there will always be a bias, but it does seem off that the standard narrative told in this country still has so many remnants from the days when Catholics were the default enemy, that it skips mentioning several quite important things (if you never learn about the recusants and the smuggling and martyring of priests, several later events make less sense), that it is so rigidly Whiggish, and that it is often told in a way that exaggerates and demonises a faith held by 10% of the pupils.