Much can be said about the absence of evidence for the concept of Mary's bodily assumption to Heaven and the dubious history of the doctrine. See "The Historical Roots Of The Reformation And Evangelicalism" in my sig below. But there's a particular line of evidence related to the assumption of Mary that's been neglected by the sources I've read on the subject. An assumption of Mary isn't mentioned in a large number of early patristic passages in which it would have been relevant to discuss such an event.
The church fathers of the earliest centuries repeatedly cite Enoch and Elijah as examples of people who didnt die, were translated to Heaven, etc. (Clement of Rome, First Clement, 9; Tertullian, A Treatise On The Soul, 50; Tertullian, On The Resurrection Of The Flesh, 58; Tertullian, Against Marcion, 5:12; Methodius, From The Discourse On The Resurrection, 14), yet they never say any such thing about Mary or include her as an example. Irenaeus, for instance, writes about the power of God to deliver people from death, and he cites Enoch, Elijah, and Paul (2 Corinthians 12:2) as illustrations of people who were "assumed" and "translated", but he says nothing of Mary (Against Heresies, 5:5).
Like the ante-Nicene sources, writers in later centuries often discuss subjects such as bodily assumptions and what happened to men like Enoch and Elijah without mentioning a bodily assumption of Mary (Apostolic Constitutions, 5:7; Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lectures, 3:6; John Chrysostom, Homilies On John, 75; Jerome, To Pammachius Against John Of Jerusalem, 29, 32; etc.). An opponent of Augustine summarized Augustines beliefs on this subject:
"Besides that, it is not only Elias, but Moses and Enoch you believe to be immortal, and to have been taken up with their bodies to heaven." (cited in Augustine, Reply To Faustus The Manichaean, 26:1)
Why no mention of Mary? On another occasion, Augustine mentions that people sometimes ask where humans who have been bodily removed from earth would go (On The Grace Of Christ, And On Original Sin, 2:27). He mentions that people ask about Enoch, Elijah, and Paul, but, once again, Mary isnt mentioned. The same is true of John Chrysostom when he discusses the same issue Augustine addressed (Homilies On Hebrews, 22).
It's a reasonable possibility that people would believe in an assumption of Mary, yet sometimes not mention it in such contexts. But the pattern described above, involving such a diversity of sources over so much time, seems to me to be significant evidence against the notion that the bodily assumption of Mary was an apostolic tradition that was understood by the church and was handed down since the time of the apostles.
The church fathers of the earliest centuries repeatedly cite Enoch and Elijah as examples of people who didnt die, were translated to Heaven, etc. (Clement of Rome, First Clement, 9; Tertullian, A Treatise On The Soul, 50; Tertullian, On The Resurrection Of The Flesh, 58; Tertullian, Against Marcion, 5:12; Methodius, From The Discourse On The Resurrection, 14), yet they never say any such thing about Mary or include her as an example. Irenaeus, for instance, writes about the power of God to deliver people from death, and he cites Enoch, Elijah, and Paul (2 Corinthians 12:2) as illustrations of people who were "assumed" and "translated", but he says nothing of Mary (Against Heresies, 5:5).
Like the ante-Nicene sources, writers in later centuries often discuss subjects such as bodily assumptions and what happened to men like Enoch and Elijah without mentioning a bodily assumption of Mary (Apostolic Constitutions, 5:7; Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lectures, 3:6; John Chrysostom, Homilies On John, 75; Jerome, To Pammachius Against John Of Jerusalem, 29, 32; etc.). An opponent of Augustine summarized Augustines beliefs on this subject:
"Besides that, it is not only Elias, but Moses and Enoch you believe to be immortal, and to have been taken up with their bodies to heaven." (cited in Augustine, Reply To Faustus The Manichaean, 26:1)
Why no mention of Mary? On another occasion, Augustine mentions that people sometimes ask where humans who have been bodily removed from earth would go (On The Grace Of Christ, And On Original Sin, 2:27). He mentions that people ask about Enoch, Elijah, and Paul, but, once again, Mary isnt mentioned. The same is true of John Chrysostom when he discusses the same issue Augustine addressed (Homilies On Hebrews, 22).
It's a reasonable possibility that people would believe in an assumption of Mary, yet sometimes not mention it in such contexts. But the pattern described above, involving such a diversity of sources over so much time, seems to me to be significant evidence against the notion that the bodily assumption of Mary was an apostolic tradition that was understood by the church and was handed down since the time of the apostles.