Of course not. She wanted to keep her throne, and did what she had to do to remain on it. I don't think there was ever a time when she didn't feel threatened. In a way, as she got older, she became just as paranoid as her father. But in her case, it was probably justified.
As much as I've read on the Tudors and British History in general, I'm still baffled by the fact that the people didn't rebel when Henry broke from Rome, and established himself as the Head of the Church in England. All the upheaval, and destruction of the monasteries, just so he could get rid of his Catholic wife, and marry another woman. Makes me wonder what history would have been like if he hadn't indulged his own selfish wants, and stayed married to Catherine of Aragon.
In the present day, the people of England have once again, simply sat back, and watched another religion take over their country.
Henry also looted all of the monasteries and rewarded those who pledged allegiance to him with the lucre.
Perhaps that is why the nobility didn’t revolt.
In this case people knew the back ground of the marriage which was as follows.
Katherine of Aragon was his older brother's widow. That means by Church law he could not marry her as she was his sister. Which was fine by him as he had no wish to marry a woman that was six years his senior. What 11 year old boy would?
But he was forced into the marriage with the Pope granting a dispensation (because the marriage was against Church law) and Katherine swearing that she was still a virgin because horny 16 year old boys are well known for not touching their wives.
When Henry turned 14 he legally renounced the marriage.
Katherine's dad then named her as ambassador to England so she could have a reason to stay there and get her hooks into Henry.
Finally four years later after his father extracted a death bed promise from Henry he married Katherine. This now makes the marriage three time a violation of Catholic Church law.
He did not enter the marriage of his free will, they were within four degrees of consanguinity by blood and it was incest by marriage .
After seven pregnant that resulted in only a living female heir Henry had finally had enough. He decided that him marriage was not fruitful because God was punishing him for his unlawful marriage. He then asked the Pope for an annulment.
He was well within the bounds of church law to ask for this but Spain wanted England and with their plan to marry Mary to her cousin, Philip of Spain (also a violation of Church law but what was one more?) it was in reach. The Pope was inclined to let that happen. England had long been a thorn in the Roman Catholic Church's side while Spain was far more likely to jump when the Pope said "Frog."
So the Pope told Henry no.
This left Henry feeling betrayed. He was a good son of the Church, so much so that he had been given the title of "Defender of the Faith" by the pope for his argument against Martin Luther.
He was living in sin and the Pope was telling him that he could not get out of it.
The legitimacy of Mary could even be called into question meaning that he might not only did not have a legitimate male heir, he might not even have a legitimate female one.
England had just gone though a century of war because of kings not having properly born heirs. It was not going to happen again.
You have to wonder how history would have changed if the Pope had followed his own Church laws and granted the annulment.
Henry would have likely married a proper Catholic princess and kept Ann as his mistress.
They did. Check out Robert Aske and the Pilgrimage of Grace, 1536. Many stood against Henry and he murdered a goodly number of them, it was horrid and vile and unchristian. This rebellion carried on in different forms through Edward and Elizabeth's reign. At one time any Catholic priest found in England was subject to the death penalty. Look up priest holes and the English martyrs, St Edmund Campion and his companions.