Questions Covered: 02:55 – During the recitation of the Gloria at Mass, we say (speaking to and about our Lord Jesus), “For You alone are the Holy One. You alone are the Lord. You alone are the Most High…” My question deals with the use of the word “ALONE” in these statements. I accept that they are all true, but I also know that they apply equally to the Father and the Holy Spirit. Understanding that the prayer intends no contradiction or diminution of the other Members of the Trinity, is this grammatical “glitch” just an artifact of translation or is there a deeper meaning present that eludes me? 07:18 – In the divine plan of things, why did Jesus come when he did? He could easily have showed up in 1930’s Louisiana and we would all be wearing electric chairs around our necks. My $0.02 take is that the year that we call “1” was the perfect time because (1) The Hebrew people have marinated long enough in the stew of Salvation History. They became mature enough to finally host the Messiah. (2) The Jews lived at the literal center of the world (the Americas and its peoples not coming into play in the divine plan for another 1500 years, of course). (3) What made the Roman Empire special was its vastness and its roads. The original information superhighway for which the early members of “The Way” can spread the messages given by The Savior. I would love to hear your take on this question. 14:45 – Does the Catechism of the Catholic Church have more authoritative power than previous conciliar documents? Isn’t the CCC the primary authoritative text currently? 17:07 – It seems like a lot of people see loved ones after they die. Can loved ones come back for a moment to comfort those they left? 21:26 – I have some friends that are Traditionalist Catholics who seem to possess a “my world is coming to an end mentality” over the fact that Pope Francis issued his Traditiones Custodes document. Could you give me some advice on how to talk to Traditionalist Catholics about why the Pope issued that document? 28:28 – During a recent program, you gave the requirements for a sin to be classified as mortal. Namely: grave matter, full knowledge, and free consent. You went on to illustrate “grave matter” with the example of stealing $1.00. If done against a millionaire it would probably not classify as “grave”, but if done against a poor person it very likely would. All of that makes perfect sense, BUT… I have a measure of OCD and the related scrupulosity. While they make me very good at my job, they also make me chafe at grey areas with high stakes, and what stakes are higher than salvation? My question is this: How can we best define the line between “grave” and “not grave” without foolishly or mistakenly convincing ourselves that what may actually be grave really isn’t? Clearly, the location of that line will vary depending upon the circumstances, but what guidance can you offer to help us draw it correctly, or at least safely, each time? To borrow a phrase from Douglas Adams, “We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty!” 36:30 – Does God have perfect knowledge of the future? 41:45 – Someone was married to someone who got caught up into Satanic worship after watching the original Rosemary’s Baby. Their house became infested with spirits who played tricks on the spouse, trying to get her to leave, mostly they hid keys or other things, so she was often late. An occult expert told her the spirits wanted her out and they would become dangerous, harm her, or even kill her. She told her husband and tearfully told him she had to leave. He had a big bonfire and burned the objects he had collected along with the books, he quit participating, and bit by bit the spirits stopped antagonizing the wife. The husband had a terminal illness, but he was never seriously ill as long as he participated but almost immediately…