Editorial

On Nov. 5, President George W. Bush signed the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act into law. But quick court challenges have prevented the law from going into effect.

How could anyone condone this gruesome abortion? It boggles my mind!

Gruesome procedure. Interestingly enough, I did not find any media coverage explaining exactly what happens in a partial-birth abortion procedure. I looked in my files for a description. Here's what I found (courtesy of Wisconsin Right to Life):

The partial-birth abortion procedure involves dilating the cervix. Then the abortionist grabs the baby by its feet and pulls the baby out of the uterus into the vaginal cavity. As the baby dangles part of the way outside the women's body and just inches from birth, the abortionist perforates the baby's skull with a sharp instrument such as scissors. The abortionist either crushes the baby's skull or suctions out the baby's brains. Once the baby is dead, the abortionist pulls the baby the remainder of the way out of the mother's body.

The majority of these awful procedures are performed on healthy babies of healthy mothers in the fifth and sixth months of pregnancy - even at much later periods of pregnancy. These babies could be born and live outside the womb. Yet, because a mother decides to terminate her pregnancy, the baby is killed in a barbaric procedure.

Health of mother. Some opponents of the new ban say that while it allows an exception to save the life of the mother, it does not include an exception for the woman's health. However, research has shown that partial-birth abortion is never medically necessary to preserve the health of the mother. In fact, it may even pose additional health risks to her.

"Health" might also be used to cover mental and emotional health, so an exception for the health of the mother would have gutted any real significance of the ban.

Court challenges. The new ban will no doubt come before the Supreme Court, which in 2000 struck down a Nebraska partial-birth abortion ban. Authors of the new law addressed some of the court's concerns with the Nebraska law.

One of those was the definition of partial-birth abortion, which some justices said was vague and could cover other abortion methods. The new law defines the procedure more precisely (similar to what I've described above).

The other concern was that an abortionist must be allowed to use the abortion method he or she believes has the lowest risk of side effects for a woman. The new law cites a number of congressional findings saying that partial-birth abortion is never medically necessary.

Hopefully the new Partial-Birth Abortion Act will stand up to any constitutional challenges. As the first major restriction placed on abortion in 30 years, it may be a sign that our nation is turning away from the culture of death and moving toward the culture of life.

Let's continue to pray and work to make that happen.

Mary C. Uhler, editor

Mailbag

	Mailbag policy We reserve the right to edit or reject letters. Limit letters to 200 words or less. All letters must be signed. Please include your city or town of residence. Send letters to: Mailbag The Catholic Herald P.O. Box 44985 Madison, WI 53744-4985 Fax: 608-821-3071 E-mail: info@madisoncatholicherald.org

To the editor:

I would just like to thank Bishop Robert C. Morlino for his article on the new Roman Missal in this past issue of the Catholic Herald.

I am pleased to read that he stated, "It would seem that there is no particular reason for our departure as a diocese from what is the preferred and standard posture of kneeling during the Eucharistic Prayer here in the United States. In fact, this is generally the practice in the Diocese of Madison . . ." and that kneeling after receiving communion will still be the norm in this Diocese.

As a convert to the Catholic Church, kneeling before our Lord present in the Eucharist upon entering church means much to me to start my Mass attendance. With the arthritis I do have, my kneeling at this point in my life is limited, so I do welcome the continuation that has been in place since I joined the church. In this day and age we indeed need "reverent and prayerful solidarity" when we come to church.

I really have no idea what drew me to the Catholic Church, but I was drawn and the older I get, the more I appreciate the way things are such as the kneeling.

Joyce Stein, Verona

To the publisher:

It is with particular gratitude that this Congregation acknowledges the contribution from the Diocese of Madison for the year 2002 to the work of the Pontifical Mission Societies.

The offering from your people of $289,730 for the Society for the Propagation of the Faith and $14,170 for the Society of Saint Peter the Apostle is an effective reflection of their realization that they are called to continue the mission of Jesus Christ ". . . even to the ends of the earth." Gratitude is offered as well for the contribution of $28,024 for the work of the Holy Childhood Association, through which the young are enabled to take their rightful place in the universal mission of the Church.

In light of the economic situation in United States and other "First World" countries, this 2002 donation takes on a more-than-ever sacrificial character. It will be used carefully to ensure that the Church may continue to proclaim the Gospel, offer the message of the fullness of life in Christ, and serve the people of the young churches of the world.

In providing for this work, of prime importance is the encouragement of each Bishop for the Diocesan Director and for the programs of the Pontifical Mission Societies, central of which is the celebration of World Mission Sunday. For your effective efforts on behalf of the missionary task, I thank you.

Again this year, in fraternal solidarity, I assure you of prayerful remembrance of you and of the generous people you serve in the name of Christ.

Crescenzio Cardinal Sepe, Prefect
Congregation for the Evangelization of People, the Vatican