Some of you may be interested in some discussions in which I've participated at another web site. Here's a thread about the sinlessness of Mary, here's one about the assumption of Mary, and there are two about the canon of scripture here and here. I don't have fifty posts yet at that forum, so I can't include links within the main body of my text. They allow me to include links in my sig, however. That's why my posts contain so many incomplete URLs and references to the links in my sig. But I think the discussions are otherwise easy to follow. You'll see some of the common Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox arguments on issues like whether Mary sinned in Luke 2:48-50, the historical evidence for an assumption of Mary, whether the canon was settled by a Pope or council in the fourth century, and whether men like Polycarp and Irenaeus should be considered Roman Catholic. Some non-Catholics and non-Orthodox have participated as well.
An Eastern Orthodox participant wrote, regarding the lack of historical evidence for an assumption of Mary:
"Is your hypothosis that all these churches somehow independently and without strife 'invented' this event and then quitely inserted it into the liturgical life of the church without anyone noticing? You seem to only want to use the ECFs when is suits you. If the ECFs are only good enough for disproving something, then you're not being honest. There is not proof of anything, regardless of how many people talked about it. Prove that Christ is Risen. You might have some circumstantial evidence, and some very biased eyewitness, but no real proof. Anyway - seems like you completely missed the point. We worship in spirit and in truth - you can keep your history."
In another thread, somebody else, a member of a non-denominational church, wrote the following in response to my citation of Biblical examples of Mary's sins:
"why is it, that we are NOT to be accusing our bretheren, yet you feel it's ok to try and find the sins of Mary? I don't think Mary was sinless either. but trying to make an itemized list of her sins? NOT cool. You should be ashamed of yourself."
A Methodist in the same thread wrote:
"Luke 2 48-50 you see Mary sinning? and complaining? She was a Mother who was worried where her son was, Jesus was still very young and if all you got is a worried Mother, then your argument of her being a sinner is a pretty weak one. I think what we see here becuase if you go on a couple lines more where Jesus goes on with them to Nazarath and is obediant and ' Mary silently treasure's all these in her heart' is Mary is now recognizing the time is coming where he will go from a child still dependant upon her and Joseph to the Messiah he was born to be. His maturing process has begun. But I'm sorry a mother worried about the safety and welfare of her son who went missing is not sinning."
There are some common objections you'll come across when discussing these issues in all four threads. Anybody who hasn't had experience addressing such objections might want to read the discussions.