One of the scenes of the Virgin Mary’s life represented by the artists and criticized by Pacheco is concerning her birth. The author states that is indecent to depict her body naked: following the same “rule” which the artists should avoid to do it with the Infant Jesus representation, also, with the Virgin’s body as a child, “with even more reason, as she is a woman”.
“I caution against painting Our Lady nude (as most people do). And this is what I said at the beginning that I had to warn against in this painting; and if we avoid it in the Infant Jesus, in the Virgin, his Mother, with even more reason, as she is a woman. I do not know what excuse the painter has, who today, in the martyrdom of St. Thomas Cantuariense, in the Anglican College, painted in a child angel that brings garland and palm to the holy martyr, a naked girl, something that should be covered by the offence of chaste eyes.”
“Advirtiendo, con esto, se huya, en todo caso, de pintar a Nuestra Señora desnuda (como hacen los más). Y esto es lo que dije al principio que tenia que advertir en esta pintura; y si la escusamos en el Niño Jesús, en la Virgen, su Madre, con más razón, por ser mujer. No sé que disculpa tiene el pintor, que hoy día, en el martirio de Santo Tomás cantuariense, en el Colegio Anglicos, pintó en un ángel niño que trae guirnalda y palma al santo mártir, conocidamente, una muchacha desnuda, cosa que debiera cubrir por la ofensa de los ojos castos.”
Pacheco 1990, 578, n. 40,42-44