Why Annunciation not Incarnation?

[AJV]

It is merely a title that stuck. There isn’t really an explanation of “why” but the primary event, the Annunciation, was so named when it entered the Roman calendar in the 7th century and has remained so named. OTOH, in several diocesan liturgical books especially from the 17th-early 19th century, the feast is named “In Annunciatione et Incarnatione…”

 

[AJV]

I suspect this issue may be revisited by the church in the future if our belief in life at conception is to be taken seriously. I believe that the feast of the Annunciation AND Incarnation should have a much greater importance on the liturgical calendar. It’s not even a holy day of obligation. Immaculate Conception of Mary is, while Jesus’ conception isn’t.

Could it be that it’s to emphasize an important dogma rather than the actual solemnity of the event? Why would the conception of Mary be of more importance than her birth, while the Lord’s day of birth is emphasized over the day of His conception?

The Conception of Mary is more important because of her unique privilege of being conceived without sin. In fact, before the dogma was declared, in the general calendar, the Conception and the Nativity had the sam rank, Double II Class.*

(* The ranks then were different - the highest was “Double I Class”, which corresponds to a “Solemnity”, and the second highest was Double II Class which corresponds to “Feast”)

 

[PJM]

=dusza;6444857]Do we celebrate this solemnity because the Archangel Gabriel made an announcement to Mary or because on that day God became man? We’re advised to bow when we proclaim our belief in the incarnation during the creed, so why isn’t today (3/25) called the Feast of the Incarnation? Even when praying the rosary we refer to the first joyful mystery as annunciation rather than incarnation.

Have at it.

***Very cleverly put:***D

The Incarntion does not take place for nine more months, with THE BIRTH OF CHRIST; True God and true Man.

The “annunciation” refers to Mary’s Highly Signifiant Role [and in a lesser manner Humanities role] while the Incarnation focus is on God’s role and sacrifice. BOTH were essential in allowing God to become “man-God.”

From the CE…
"The Feast of the Annunciation of the Blessed Virgin Mary (25 March), also called in old calendars: FESTUM INCARNATIONIS, INITIUM REDEMPTIONIS CONCEPTIO CHRISTI, ANNUNTIATIO CHRISTI, ANNUNTIATIO DOMINICA. In the Orient, where the part which Mary took in the Redemption is celebrated by a special feast, 26 December, the Annunciation is a feast of Christ; in the Latin Church, it is a feast of Mary. It probably originated shortly before or after the council of Ephesus (c. 431). At the time of the Synod of Laodicea (372) it was not known; St. Proclus, Bishop of Constantinople (d. 446), however, seems to mention it in one of his homilies. He says, that the feast of the coming of Our Lord and Saviour, when He vested Himself with the nature of man (quo hominum genus indutus), was celebrated during the entire fifth century. This homily, however, may not be genuine, or the words may be understood of the feast of Christmas.

In the Latin Church this feast is first mentioned in the Sacramentarium of Pope Gelasius (d. 496), which we possess in a manuscript of the seventh century; it is also contained in the Sacramentarium of St. Gregory (d. 604), one manuscript of which dates back to the eighth century. Since these sacramentaries contain additions posterior to the time of Gelasius and Gregory, Duchesne (Origines du culte chrétien, 118, 261) ascribes the origin of this feast in Rome to the seventh century; Probst, however, (Sacramentarien, 264) thinks that it really belongs to the time of Pope Gelasius. The tenth Synod of Toledo (656), and Trullan Synod (692) speak of this feast as one universally celebrated in the Catholic Church. "

Love and prayers,

Pat

 

[japhy]

The Incarntion does not take place for nine more months, with THE BIRTH OF CHRIST; True God and true Man.

I wouldn’t say that. Christ was Incarnate at the moment He was conceived in Mary’s womb. That’s why, in the Creed, we (will) say “by the Holy Spirit [He] was incarnate (not “born”) of the Virgin Mary and became man.” Jesus became man at the moment of His Incarnation, the moment when He first took flesh: when He was conceived in the womb of His mother.

As I explain it in my book…
The man Jesus was not conceived like other men, but by the Holy Spirit in the virginal womb of Mary, who retained her virginity before, during, and after the birth of Jesus. Jesus took His flesh and blood from His mother, Mary. At the very instant of His conception, Jesus was God and man in perfection, and His human soul was instantly filled with the Holy Spirit. The Incarnation is such an important mystery of the faith that at the words “and by the Holy Spirit… became man” (“et incarnatus … homo factus est”) we make a profound bow of the body in reverence.

In the old translation of the Creed, the phrase “incarnatus est” was translated as “he was born” instead of “he was incarnate.” By saying “he was born (natus est) of the Virgin Mary and became man,” one might assume that He only “became man” at His birth. This is contrary to the true text of the Creed, and also to the faith of the Church concerning the humanity of the unborn: at the moment of conception, there is a living human being, a person. Jesus became man at the moment He received His flesh, at His conception, not at His birth.

 

[PJM]

=japhy;6479963]I wouldn’t say that. Christ was Incarnate at the moment He was conceived in Mary’s womb. That’s why, in the Creed, we (will) say “by the Holy Spirit [He] was incarnate (not “born”) of the Virgin Mary and became man.” Jesus became man at the moment of His Incarnation, the moment when He first took flesh: when He was conceived in the womb of His mother.

As I explain it in my book…
The man Jesus was not conceived like other men, but by the Holy Spirit in the virginal womb of Mary, who retained her virginity before, during, and after the birth of Jesus. Jesus took His flesh and blood from His mother, Mary. At the very instant of His conception, Jesus was God and man in perfection, and His human soul was instantly filled with the Holy Spirit. The Incarnation is such an important mystery of the faith that at the words “and by the Holy Spirit… became man” (“et incarnatus … homo factus est”) we make a profound bow of the body in reverence.

In the old translation of the Creed, the phrase “incarnatus est” was translated as “he was born” instead of “he was incarnate.” By saying “he was born (natus est) of the Virgin Mary and became man,” one might assume that He only “became man” at His birth. This is contrary to the true text of the Creed, and also to the faith of the Church concerning the humanity of the unborn: at the moment of conception, there is a living human being, a person. Jesus became man at the moment He received His flesh, at His conception, not at His birth.

Your of course right AND correct too I was simply trying to mke a point

Love and prayers,

Pat