It most certainly is. It’s evidence of her total irrelevance in the teachings of the apostles or that it was considered of importance to the Holy Spirit to have them mention her.
Why, if it is true that Mary was “TOTALLY” irrelevant to the teaching of the Apostles, is there so much about her in the gospels? Everything in the gospels was TRADITION for decades before it was written down.
And you have missed my point: I pointed to the absence of any tradition regarding a TOMB or RELICS. I didn’t say there was an absence of tradition regarding MARY. As I pointed out: If there WERE no tradition about Mary in the early Church, she wouldn’t be mentioned in the gospels.
You are so eager to make a snarky retort, you aren’t even reading the posts you respond to.