Absolutely not.
The angel did NO SUCH THING. That is an error. The angel gave her no such title. All the "therefore" this-and-that following is erroneous reasoning and speculation, rendering it worse than worthless, for it's only true worth is in support of theological error.
This is serious business.
In the more original (than Jerome's Vulgate) Greek, no single text out of some 5,000 extant Greek texts indicate that the angel "addressed her with the unique title "She who is full of grace" " or said that she was "full of grace" quote-unquote.
Please, STOP inventing things, or perhaps more precisely stop unquestioningly following after and repeating those who do alter & invent, particularly when evidence to the contrary of the alterations and inventions is presented.
Previously, I had neglected to include link to Matt's clear refutation of precisely the contention of yours which is highlighted above, at the top of this reply.
This seems to be a good place to amend that prior lack.
Mary, full of grace, and Luke 1:28 The information he presents there clearly and unequivocally refutes the contention or claim that the angel told Mary she was "full of grace" in that passage, showing also that there WERE two other instances in the NT where the phrase was used;
As for the second verse which uses "full of grace", I will again utilize NKJV rather than the NASB95 which Matt Slick embedded access to on his page which I have provided link to.
There are reasons I chose this way, chief among them is that the NKJV includes markings and footnote showing what NU texts (the oldest of the Greek Uncial, or all-capital letter texts) indicate or omit. The Uncial texts are the oldest extant NY manuscripts in the world, I take it, with what is called "miniscules" which are more in Greek cursive style, also mixing upper and lower case lettering significantly more numerous.
Other than or besides NKJV there are translations which include some form of NU text indications also...but being I cannot recall which at this moment, so the NKJV can suffice for now.
Occurring rather serendipitously in the next [below] example of a NT verse which Matt referred to in discussion and textual comparison in regards to Luke 1:28, indicates that in Acts 6:8 "full of grace..." is in the Greek NU text, even though the NKJV translators chose to not include the word "grace" but instead used the word "faith", as the footnotes indicate.
Which shows the value of the footnotes -- for they lead to being able to understand what the Uncial (oldest!) show in comparison to later arising miniscules, and many other English translations all at once --- without having to engage in further laborious searching.
This makes the NKJV valuable as tool for greater scriptural and historical insight, for we need not necessarily trust NKJV alone, yet with it's moderately modernized language compared to Authorized KJV 1611 and later revisions (1773 was it, for the first major revision?) which makes the NKJV and it's modern footnotes something of a bridge between the old and many newer, while also reaching back to the oldest known in existence. B-A-utival, baby...
Still with me? Here we go;
Footnotes:
[a] Acts 6:8 NU-Text reads grace.
Got that. "Full of grace..." and in this case...and power also.
In comparison Luke 1:28 does not include "full of grace" other than in Latin Vulgate, and in those English language texts which rely upon that Latin text.
All of which shows that Jerome's own choice of words, over the centuries have been conflated into being false support for Marion doctrines in the manner which you argued.
Sorry lady, you lose. The scripture refutes Roman Catholic apologetic in this narrow aspect. Please STOP using Challoner Douay-Rheims in effort to make a theological case or argument in support of this doctrine, for the very DR foundation itself is seriously flawed.
Going to Matt Slick's page (if you would) and looking also at what I have sent to you directly, can you see now how the contention you bring is "all wet"?
Asa another note of self-correction for my previous comment to you on this thread, the link I attempted to give to preselected parallel translation at the Unbound Bible I see failed, for that site is apparently not designed to allow linking for preselected pages. I just tried it again and see the html in the address bar reads "https://unbound.biola.edu/index.cfm?method=searchResults.doSearch" instead of an address which can link to preselected comparative, side-by-side format. But the online Unbound Bible can still be a useful tool, just not for handy linking in the course of online discussion.
The idea that any human, even Mary was sinless is anti-Christian doctrine
You seem to be addressing somebody other than me. I do not own, have never read, and don't even know where I could find access to a "Challoner Douay-Rheims". I haven't yet tried Google.
I am making reasonable inferences from Greek grammar. Who don't my critics address the grammar, instead of these tedious cut-and-paste rebuttals which don't quite focus on the actual Greek words?
The term "Kechaitomene" is unexampled in ANY Greek literature --- Classical, Koine or Modern --- other than in the Gospel of Luke.
Luke/Gabriel are using a term which exists nowhere else --- not referring to Jesus, not referring to Stephen, nowhere. Yes, there are other terms translated "full of grace" (Jesus and Stephen) -- which is to say , pleres charitos --It seems strangely incurious not to ask "Why?" Why did Luke/Gabriel coin a new word her?
Although the same or similar words, "full" or "filled" with grace, are used for Jesus, for Mary, and for St. Stephen, it does not mean exactly the same for all three. If it did, we'd be in the position of saying that the blessedness of Jesus, Mary, and St. Stephen are indistinguishable, identical -- which they are not, as I'm sure you'll agree.
How can they be distinguished, then?
The Greek grammar shows how.
Kecharitomene is a Greek perfect, passive, participle, --- with a feminine ending, too --- which could literally be translated "having been graced," since the root of the word is "charis", which means grace. Ephesians 1:6, which refers to Jesus Christ, uses the aorist, active, indicative echaritosen, meaning "he graced."
See the difference? Mary, passive voice, she received grace; Jesus, active voice, "He graced." This is due to the fact that Jesus is a Divine person; Mary is a human person, a creature and handmaid.
In Luke 1:28 "Kecharitomene" is nominative or titular, since it follows the greeting "Chaire" ---"Hail [name or title] --- thus the name would automatically be capitalized in English translations.
The unique feature of Kecharitomene is that it is in the Greek perfect tense, denoting that the state of grace began in past time, by a completed action (hence "fully" accomplished), whose results continue in the present. A suitable translation to denote all these features might be "Fully-Graced One." The Greek passive voice denotes that Mary received the title from an outside source, in this case, ALmighty God.
The New Testament uses a different Greek erm "pleres charitos" ("full of grace") to describe Jesus (John 1:14) and Stephen (Acts 6:8), but these usages are not as specific to time, agent and continuity as Kecharitomene.
Like all of the name changes in the Bible, it indicates the person's status as seen by God, the person's predestined giftedness in order to be equipped to play their role in God's plan:
Abram ---> Abraham (Father of Nations)
Sarai ---> Sarah (Princess)
Jacob ---> Israel (Wrestles with God)
Simon ---> Cephas (Rock)
The same is true when Mary is addressed (nominative or titular) as Kecharitomene (Fully-Graced One). It's the only place in the Bible --- the only place in all of Greek literature ---where this word is used as a form of address. It's unique. It doesn't make her equal to God (passive voice: it's been done unto her) and not identical to what's said of Stephen, because it's past (the state of grace completed in past time), perfect (a completed and accomplished action), continuing (its results continue into the present), nominative (name/ title bestowed by an outside agent, in this case, God.) This unique neologism Kecharitomene is the best Greek word that could have been invented by Divine inspiration to indicate Mary's sinlessness, her being equipped to play her role as the natural source of Christ's human nature, His flesh: human, yet untainted by sin. No other Greek formulation could have conveyed it all.
I'm not familiar with "Challoner Douay-Rheims", but if there's something there that discusses the fascinating uniqueness of the name/title "Kecharitomene," I'd say, "Really? I love new words, especially Angelic ones. I'm curious. Tell me more."