He had no lack of precedent for the practice, and, so far as the actual practice itself is concerned, it would be difficult to show that it was unjustifiable or simoniacal so long as confined within certain well-defined bounds, and so long as the sums levied by it were properly employed to the benefit of Christianity.

It is a practice comparable to the mulcting of a civil offender against magisterial laws.

Because our magistrates levy fines, it does not occur to modern critics to say that they sell pardons and immunity from gaol.

It is universally recognized as a wise and commendable measure, serving the two-fold purpose of punishing the offender and benefiting the temporal State against which he has offended.

Need it be less commendable in the case of spiritual offences against a spiritual State?
It is more useful than the imposition of the pattering of a dozen prayers at bedtime, and since, no doubt, it falls more heavily upon the offender, it possibly makes to an even greater extent for his spiritual improvement.
Thus considered, this "sale" of indulgences loses a deal of the heinousness with which it has been invested.