Replies

Or evidence that it was believed from the beginning. Unless you can show that early Christians did not believe in the perpetual virginity of Mary you cannot assume that it was a later accretion.

No, no, that is not how you establish authenticity of doctrine. Seriously, consider what you are engaging in. Based upon your absence of proof rule, unless you can show that early Christians did not believe in Mary or anyone being teleported to different locales, walking on water, making adversaries blind, parting the sea of Galilee, and never dying, , etc. etc. you cannot assume that this did not happen, and that the NT church did not believe these things.

Of course, you can agree that these are not found in "oral tradition," but neither was the bodily assumption of Mary for hundreds of years when it surely would be attested to.
As Ratzinger states,

Before Mary's bodily Assumption into heaven was defined, all theological faculties in the world were consulted for their opinion. Our teachers' answer was emphatically negative . What here became evident was the one-sidedness, not only of the historical, but of the historicist method in theology. “Tradition” was identified with what could be proved on the basis of texts. Altaner , the patrologist from Wurzburg…had proven in a scientifically persuasive manner that the doctrine of Mary’s bodily Assumption into heaven was unknown before the 5C ; this doctrine, therefore, he argued, could not belong to the “apostolic tradition. And this was his conclusion, which my teachers at Munich shared .

This argument is compelling if you understand “tradition” strictly as the handing down of fixed formulas and texts [meaning having actual substance in history]…But if you conceive of “tradition” as the living process whereby the Holy Spirit introduces us to the fullness of truth and teaches us how to understand what previously we could still not grasp (cf. Jn 16:12-13), then subsequent “remembering” (cf. Jn 16:4, for instance) can come to recognize what it has not caught sight of [even bcz there was nothing to see] previously and was already handed down [invisibly, without evidence] in the original Word,” — J. Ratzinger, Milestones (Ignatius, n.d.), 58-59 (words in [brackets] are mine).

Thus, Rome can "remember" what history "forgot" or inexplicably neglected to record.

Meanwhile, in Ethiopian Orthodox y you have the “Miracles of Mary,” a legendary narrative about the miracles of the Virgin Mary. Tales of these miracles circulated in Syria and Egypt long before the end of the fourth century, which enjoyed extensive popularity in Europe from the fifth to the 11thcentury, though once condemned by a local (not ecumenical) council in Rome in 494 A.D.

In one story, she miraculously gives marvelous apparel to a monk who has neither food nor clothing (Chapter 4). Another describes how she helps a drunken monk named Timothy lead a righteous life (Chapter 37). A third tells how a wrongly persecuted monk who trusts in her is vindicated.

In the story of the Virgin Mary and the Monastery of Ankona, the Virgin miraculously transfers the monastery to the border of Jericho and rebuilds it there – to the great astonishment of both the monks and the people of the city.

Another story relates the saga of the abbess Sophia, who illegitimately conceives a child by a young manservant. Later, the Virgin Mary tells the angels to remove the child from the penitent abbess Sophia’s womb and give him to a man named Felix.

Then there is,

A man from the town of Kemer devours 78 people, including his family and friends, before setting out in search of more. Shortly before he dies, the cannibal gives a leprous beggar a drink when the thirsty man asks for it in the name of the Virgin Mary. When the cannibal’s soul is weighed in the balance, the little drops of water outweigh the souls he has devoured and the cannibal is saved – to the amazement of the angels of light. Source: https://cnewa.org/magazine/miracles-of-mary-30776

However, the Holy Spirit reproved thinking of mortals "above that which is written," (1 Co. 4:6) and typical hyper "veneration" of Mary are claims which exalt her by ascribing aspects which largely parallel those of the Lord Jesus.

For in the the Catholic quest to almost deify Mary, it is taught by Catholics*,

As the the Son of God has a unique unique relationship with the Persons of the Trinity, so also Mary is said to have a unique relationship with all three Persons of the Trinity;
As Christ is the express image of God, and highly exalted above all under the Father, having the primary position among all creation, so Mary is declared to be the greatest saint of all, and the first of all creatures, and as having a certain affinity with the Father, with a pre-eminent resemblance which she bears to the Father;
As Christ was called the Son of God, indicating ontological oneness, so Mary is called the Mother of God (which naturally infers the same, and is not the language of Scripture, which even clarifies Israel birthed Christ "according to the flesh, God blessed for ever": Rm. 9:4,5);
As the the Son of God supernaturally, spiritually makes believing souls into children of God, Mary is said to be the mother of Christians in "supernatural and spiritual generation."
As Christ was sinless, so Mary was;
As the Lord remained a virgin, so also Mary;
As the Lord was bodily ascended into Heaven, so Mary also was;
As the Holy Spirit directs believers to be "Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith," (Hebrews 12:2) in whom believes are accounted a holy nation, (1 Pt. 2:9) so Catholicism teaches that believers are to "turn their eyes to Mary" in whom "the Church is already the 'all-holy." (CCC 829)
As the Father made Christ Lord over all things, so Mary is said to be enthroned above all creation (all other believers have to wait for their crowns) and exalted by the Lord as Queen over all things;
As Christ is given all power in heaven and in earth, so Mary is “surpassing in power all the angels and saints in Heaven.”
As Christ is given all power on Heaven and on earth, so Mary is said to have (showing some restraint) “almost unlimited power;” and showing less restraint, to be "omnipotent" (by grace);
As God the Father made His Divine Son functionally the Lord over the universe, so Mary states, "I command what I will, and introduce whom I will."
As no man comes to the Father but through the Son, so it is taught that no one can come to the Son except through Mary in Heaven;
As no one can obtain mercy, be saved/redeemed or be delivered and know the Father but through the Son, so the same is said of Mary;
As those whom God has chosen will come to Him, so it is said that if Mary wills our salvation, and then we are sure to obtain it.
As the emphasis is upon Christ as the Creator through whom God (the Father) made all things, including Mary, so it is emphasized that uniquely “to her, Jesus owes His Precious Blood,” shed for the salvation of mankind, (the logic behind which can lead back to Eve);
As Scripture declares that Christ suffered for our sins, so Mary is said to have done so also, even all the consequences of sin;
As Christ redeemed mankind (as many as truly believe) with the Father and the Spirit, so it is said of Mary that "we might rightly say she redeemed the human race together with Christ."
As Christ saves us from the condemnation and death resulting from the fault of Adam, so it is taught that man was condemned through the fault of Eve, the root of death, but that we are saved through the merits of Mary; who was the source of life for everyone.
As all things come from the Father through the Son, so Mary is made to be the dispenser of all grace; that "through her are obtained every hope, every grace, and all salvation."
As believers have confidence through Christ, so Mary is extolled as being the foundation of all the believer's confidence.
As the Lord wills all souls to be saved through Christ, so it is said that it is God's will that we obtain everything through Mary.
And as the Lord called souls to come to Him to be given life and salvation, so (in misappropriation of the words of Scripture) it is said of Mary, “He that shall find me shall find life, and shall have salvation from the Lord;” “that through her are obtained every hope, every grace, and all salvation. For this is His will, that we obtain everything through Mary.”
As Christ is the King of the saints and over all kings, (Rv. 15:3; 17:14; 19:16) so Mary is made Queen of Heaven and the greatest saint, and that “Next to God, she deserves the highest praise;”
As Christ ever liveth to make intercession for the saints, so is Mary said to be in constant intercession;
as only to God is ascribed the power and privilege of hearing prayer from all flesh, so also is Mary extolled as doing so;
as believers only address God/Christ in prayer to Heaven, including in prostration before Him, so also do Catholics pray to Mary;
as believers only pray to God to have mercy on sinners, so Catholics beseech Mary to do so.
As Catholics (adding error to error) believe Christ gave His "real" flesh and blood to be eaten, so it is emphasized that Mary gave Him this, being fashioned out of Mary's pure blood and even being “kneaded with the admixture of her virginal milk,” so that she can say, "Come and eat my bread, drink the wine I have prepared" (Prov. 9:5);
And as Christ is given many titles of honor, so Mary also is, except that she is honored by Catholics with more titles than they give to the Lord Himself!

Mary was a holy, virtuous instrument of God, but of whom Scripture says relatively little, while holy fear ought to restrain ascribing positions, honor, glory and powers to a mortal that God has not revealed as given to them, and or are only revealed as being possessed by God Himself. But like as the Israelites made an instrument of God an object of worship, (Num. 21:8,9; 2Kg. 18:4) Catholics have magnified Mary far beyond what is written and warranted and even allowed, based on what is in Scripture.