"We have known for some time that there were widespread “Transitus Stories” that date from the sixth century that teach Mary’s glorious Assumption." I have no problem with this. I have a problem that they started in the sixth century.
"If the pope had genuinely condemned the teaching of the Assumption, great saints and defenders of orthodoxy such as St. Gregory and later St. John Damascene would not have taught it." Based on what, exactly?
"Further, we would have found other writers condemning this teaching as it became more and more popular throughout the world." That is to assume the church cannot err. I do not believe that.
"what some believe to be a fourth-century homily on the prophet Simeon and the Blessed Virgin Mary by Timothy, a priest of Jerusalem, which asserts Mary is “immortal to the present time through him who had his abode in her and who assumed and raised her above the higher regions.”" What some believe is not persuasive in the least.
"Indeed, the Church even to this day has not decided definitively the matter of whether Mary died or not, though at the level of the Ordinary Magisterium it does teach that Mary died" Which I am sure with enough time, the Catholic Church will in fact have a dogma for that as well
"In fact, it appears they were teaching Mary never died at all. This would be in keeping with John of Thessalonica, Timothy of Jerusalem, and others who taught this among Christians. However, these women were taking Mary and the Assumption to the extreme by worshiping her." Do you have any idea what this looks like? It looks like Catholics want to say that if the assumption of Mary wasn't true then there would be people condemning it. But when someone (Epiphanius) does condemn it, they, what appears to me, try and rewrite history.
"He will elsewhere clarify the fact that he is not certain, and no one is,
at least not definitively so, about whether or not she died. But he never says the same about the Assumption itself." This seems like an argument from silence.
In conclusion, the stories of Mary's assumption do not begin until the sixth century. That is perhaps four centuries removed from the event with no conclusive evidence that Mary was, as in, a fact, assumed into heaven. So why did the Pope make this an Ex-Cathedra dogma? It is not based on the evidence, but there was a different motive for it. That is beyond problematic if you ask me.
But Catholics and Orthodox folks can believe what they want. I'm not here to make them Protestant. I just hope you can see how this issue alone prevents me from being Catholic or Orthodox.