1. May a pregnant woman in danger of death from eclampsia or hemorrhage be prematurely delivered of a viable child?
2. May a woman in the same condition be delivered in urgency by means which will kill the infant?
3. May a woman _in articulo mortis_ be delivered of a viable child if the delivery will somewhat hasten her death?
4. May the woman in question 1 be delivered of an inviable fetus?
5. May the woman in question 3 be delivered of an inviable fetus?
6. May a woman who is about to become blind, paralytic, or insane from her pregnancy be prematurely delivered of a viable child?
7. May the woman in question 6 be delivered by means which will kill the fetus?
8. May the woman in question 6 be delivered of an inviable child?
9. May the woman in question 6 be delivered of an inviable child, supposing the child to be _in articulo mortis_?
10. May an ectopic fetus be killed by operation, electricity, or poison, to avert possible danger of death from the mother?
11. May a surgeon who has opened the abdomen for some condition not uterine incidentally remove a viable ectopic fetus?
12. With conditions like those in question 11, except that the fetus is not viable, may the surgeon remove the inviable ectopic fetus?
Three years later, August 19, 1889, the Holy Office answered these questions comprehensively: "In Catholic schools it may not be safely taught that craniotomy is licit, as was decided May 28, 1884, or any other surgical operation which directly kills the fetus or the pregnant mother." _Safely taught_ here is a somewhat technical expression which has been interpreted by the Holy Office in another connection as meaning that the act is illicit morally.
The Holy Office, May 4, 1898, again decreed: "Necessitate cogente, licitam esse laparotomiam ad extrahendos e sinu matris ectopicos conceptus, dummodo et foetus et matris vitae, quantum fieri potest, serio et opportune provideatur."[104] This decision was not clearly understood, and on March 5, 1902, the same congregation reported the following question: "Is it ever licit to remove from the maternal pelvis an ectopic fetus which is still immature; that is, which has not yet completed the sixth month after conception?" The answer was, "No; according to the decree of May 4, 1898, which prescribes that the life of the fetus and the mother must as far as possible be carefully safeguarded. As to the time, according to the same decree, the questioner will remember that no premature delivery is permissible unless it is effected at such a time and by those methods which in ordinary circumstances safeguard the life of the mother and fetus."[105]