Since, then, the ancient laws were totally disregarded, and tithe, and other church property, was perverted to individual uses for so long a period with perfect impunity, we cannot be surprised to find these more recent appointments were gradually evaded, or abused; so that, step by step, the doings of that church, which still boasts of its rule and guide over millions of minds, was so utterly detested in this country that even the genius of a Wolsey could not save it from perdition. And what secures and sustains the present structure? How has the church in Paddington been supported since the Reformation? We have already seen that the rectory was disposed of, with the manor, by Henry the eighth, to Sir Edward and Dame Baynton. It thus became _impropriate_. {123} But it was again appropriated; this time by a corporation sole. For, when the bishops of London claimed the rectory of Paddington as a “member and appurtenance” of the manor, did they not become the real rectors of the parish? Certainly, from time to time, since Bishop Sheldon’s day, if not before, they have leased the rectory with the manor, and exercised the right of appointing the curate here. Are they not, then, accountable for the proper application of the rectory revenues? And how have these revenues been applied? We are informed that the fourth protestant bishop of London thought Paddington would make a comfortable retiring pension for his porter; and the enemies of Bishop Aylmer brought this misdeed as one of their many accusations against him. His faithful biographer, Strype, admitting the fact, thus defends the bishop:—