Francisco Pacheco in this passage created a response to Francisco de Rioja with the intention of counter-arguing him on his theory that Christ would be crucified with three nails, instead of four. Also, the author states that Christ should be not naked, but rather wear a white cloth and use the crown of thorns on the Cross.
Molanus comments on iconographies which are derived from apocryphal sources, in particular those which are well spread among the populace. His stance on this matter is rather balanced: as long as the artworks do not contain any dangerous errors and they have been approved by the regional authority, they do not have to be taken away from their respective locations so that common people could not be disturbed by such actions.
Letter of the Suprema to the Inquisitiors of the town of Valencia describing some cavases that allegedly entered the kingdom and recommending that they be collected so that they do not continue to circulate.
An agreement of the Council of the Inquisition describes how, after various consultations with the different local courts, it was decided to ban a series of paintings on the grounds that they might incur false dogmas
In November 1571 the Council of the Inquisition sent to different local inquisitions an agreement which banned a series of paintings and prints on the grounds that they might incur false dogmas.
Edict of the Holy Office of Mexico describing some cavases that allegedly entered the kingdom and recommending that they be collected so that they do not continue to circulate. The Inquisition express the fear that the images convey Lutheran errors
Within the Passion of Christ, Pacheco analyses the representation of the crowning of Jesus Christ. Following his study about the crown material, the author states that it was not made by thorns from sea reeds, as were made by artists in that time (not following appropriately the elements of that context).
The correct way of representing the clothes of Christ in the “The procession to Calvary with the cross”
The Passion of Christ iconography was an important topic for Pacheco. The author in this passage analyses the scene of “The procession to Calvary with the cross”, and presented the artwork made by Luis de Vargas as an example of an inadequate manner of depicting Christ: wearing only one tunic, instead of two garments on him, mantle, and skirt (the correct manner).
The iconography of Passion of Christ was an important topic for Pacheco. When the author analysed the scene of “The procession to Calvary with the cross”, he examined the scene in which Simon of Cyrene helps Jesus to carry his cross. It can be depicted in two manners according to the author: Cyrene helping Christ behind him, carrying the end of the Cross; or Jesus Christ would have passed it to the shoulder of Cyrene so that he carried it alone. Pacheco states should not be reprehended if painted in one way or the other.
The Passion of Christ iconography was an important topic for Pacheco. When the author analysed the scene of the “Resurrection”, among several observations on how to do it, he states the inadequate manners to depict such a scene: the tomb of Christ opened and Christ takes one leg out to get out of it around it, also the terrified guards covering themselves, some with their shields and, behind, reaching for their swords. All these elements should be avoided.
To represent Christ as Ecce Homo, the correct iconography of Jesus Christ determined by Pacheco was that Jesus must have the crown of thorns in his head, the purple cloak, and his cane in his right hand. That’s the reason why he criticised Pablo de Céspedes, who painted without a cane in his hand, and mainly Luis de Morales, who executed more than one artwork with Jesus without a crown of thorns (only the signs of the wounds), as well as paintings in which Christ is carrying the cross on his back without the crown of thorns (considered terrific untruthfulness to the biblical sources).