I-L: There seems to be a resurgence in interest in the historical Mary lately with the release of your book and The Nativity Story movie. What do you think is behind this interest?

SMcK: Three things: the song "Mary did you know?" by Mark Lowry, who gave evangelicals something they could trust about Mary. The figure of Mary in Mel Gibson's movie who, though thoroughly fashioned from Roman Catholic cloth and imagery, is a pleasing and credible character. And now the younger generation that is much less denominationally-restrictive and which wants to explore Mary images.

I-L: How do you think the Emerging Church's interest in Mary, with its affection for an "ancient-future faith" fits in with the larger aims of the movement?

SMcK: I don't see much about Mary in the emerging movement, to be honest. I see a chapter in McLaren's Generous Orthodoxy that showed interest in Mary, but I've not seen much. I hope my book will encourage that discussion.

I-L: Why do you think we see more interest in Mary from Emergents than we do Evangelicals?

SMcK: Evangelicals have shut Mary down and reduced her to a piece in a Christmas crèche, unless of course those "evangelicals" happen to be Anglican. Otherwise, Mary is just avoided. The emerging movement has an interest in opening questions that evangelicals don't want to open. That might explain it.

Our resident Pharisee pastor sounds off on the recent spate of "Mariolotry" and how he plans to react to the release of Scot McKnight's new book. As you might guess, he is less than amused and more than a little bit acerbic.

What about a "Bible only" hermeneutic?
Many Christians state that they believe "the Bible only." Instead of depending on human interpretation, traditions, commentaries, or added writings, their focus is on the Bible as their only source of truth from God. We commend them for recognizing human failings and for being on guard against false teaching. However, we believe that many have misunderstood what it means to believe the Bible only.

Historically, Christianity during the pre-Reformation period ascribed as much importance to tradition and scholastic teaching as they did the Bible itself. In many instances, Christians believed and taught things that were actually contrary to the clear teachings of scripture. Later, Reformation leaders promoted the concept of "sola Scriptura" (Latin for Scripture alone) as the source of truth, instead of relying on tradition, the Pope, and the Catholic Church for truth. This was also coupled with the idea that the Bible belonged in the hands of the people and that everyone should read and understand it for themselves. At the time, this was a radical idea - that scripture could be read by the average person and understood accurately.

Since then, Fundamentalism has taken sola Scriptura to another level. "We believe the Bible only" has inadvertently become a rhetorical device for disregarding the counsel of others. We at Ill-Legalism have seen instances where individuals were discouraged from reading commentaries and other Bible helps because we should not lend credence to what man teaches, but only God alone through his word. We believe this is a gross distortion of the original intent of sola Scriptura.