The Saint Euphrosynos Cafe

Thank you Maria, regarding your question on when this error started to creep in, the oldest icon I can find dates to the 8th century.

This actually looks more like a Coptic icon though it was preserved at St. Catherine's monastery during the Iconoclast period so I assume its Eastern Orthodox.

Maria wrote:

It was the 6th Ecumenical Council which corrected the Nativity Icon and urged iconographers not to use the midwife and bathing scene.
How can truly faithful Orthodox ignore the canons of an Ecumenical Council, which have been declared to be infallible? We are to hold the canons of the first 7 Ecumenical Councils as infallible.

[/quote][/quote]

Oh really? Where can I read this? I don't see anything forbidding the depiction of a midwife in the Nativity icon in the 79th Canon and there is no explicit reference in the GOC-Matthewite 1992 encyclical you posted.

Canon 79 Council in Trullo (A.D. 692)

As we confess the divine birth of the Virgin to be without any childbed, since it came to pass without seed, and as we preach this to the entire flock, so we subject to correction those who through ignorance do anything which is inconsistent therewith. Wherefore since some on the day after the holy Nativity of Christ our God are seen cooking σεμίδαλῖν, and distributing it to each other, on pretext of doing honour to the puerperia of the spotless Virgin Maternity, we decree that henceforth nothing of the kind be done by the faithful. For this is not honouring the Virgin (who above thought and speech bare in the flesh the incomprehensible Word) when we define and describe, from ordinary things and from such as occur with ourselves, her ineffable parturition. If therefore anyone henceforth be discovered doing any such thing, if he be a cleric let him be deposed, but if a layman let him be cut off.

Synod of the GOC (under Andreas) dated January 23, 1992.
Concerning the veneration of certain icons.

1. The icon of the Nativity of our Lord Jesus Christ we urge pious iconographers henceforth to paint without the depiction of the bath and midwives so as to give no cause for doubt regarding the painless childbearing by the Theotokos, as in the analogous circumstance, the fathers of the 7th Ecumenical Council decreed, "Confessing the divine childbirth to have resulted from the Virgin… without its being induced by seed; and preaching to all the flock, we require those who have done anything that was improper to submit to correction." (79th Canon, Sacred Rudder, p.289) [Orig. encyclical. incorrectly ascribes this canon to the 7th E. C. and not the 6th E. C.]

Maria wrote:

It was the 6th Ecumenical Council which corrected the Nativity Icon and urged iconographers not to use the midwife and bathing scene.
How can truly faithful Orthodox ignore the canons of an Ecumenical Council, which have been declared to be infallible? We are to hold the canons of the first 7 Ecumenical Councils as infallible.

Oh really? Where can I read this? I don't see anything forbidding the depiction of a midwife in the Nativity icon in the 79th Canon and there is no explicit reference in the GOC-Matthewite 1992 encyclical you posted.

Canon 79 Council in Trullo (A.D. 692)

As we confess the divine birth of the Virgin to be without any childbed, since it came to pass without seed, and as we preach this to the entire flock, so we subject to correction those who through ignorance do anything which is inconsistent therewith. Wherefore since some on the day after the holy Nativity of Christ our God are seen cooking σεμίδαλῖν, and distributing it to each other, on pretext of doing honour to the puerperia of the spotless Virgin Maternity, we decree that henceforth nothing of the kind be done by the faithful. For this is not honouring the Virgin (who above thought and speech bare in the flesh the incomprehensible Word) when we define and describe, from ordinary things and from such as occur with ourselves, her ineffable parturition. If therefore anyone henceforth be discovered doing any such thing, if he be a cleric let him be deposed, but if a layman let him be cut off.

Synod of the GOC (under Andreas) dated January 23, 1992.
Concerning the veneration of certain icons.

1. The icon of the Nativity of our Lord Jesus Christ we urge pious iconographers henceforth to paint without the depiction of the bath and midwives so as to give no cause for doubt regarding the painless childbearing by the Theotokos, as in the analogous circumstance, the fathers of the 7th Ecumenical Council decreed, "Confessing the divine childbirth to have resulted from the Virgin… without its being induced by seed; and preaching to all the flock, we require those who have done anything that was improper to submit to correction." (79th Canon, Sacred Rudder, p.289) [Orig. encyclical. incorrectly ascribes this canon to the 7th E. C. and not the 6th E. C.][/quote]

Cyprian, I am greatly confused about what was written here by the GOC as there is some disagreement if it were the 6th or 7th Ecumenical Council.

Bottom Line: I was specifically instructed not to purchase or to venerate any Nativity Icon that shows midwives bathing the Christ-Child as no midwives were needed.

Our Lady miraculously bore the Christ Child without pain, and without violating her virginity. In other words, her birth was not a vaginal birth, and thus, no bath was needed nor was any childbirth bed. Thus, no midwive was necessary.

Maria, I just want anyone to provide an exact citation where any Ecumenical Council forbade icons of the Nativity depicting mid-wives bathing the Christ Child. There are hundreds (if not thousands) of ancient examples all over the world going back nearly a thousand years or more. It is a very common iconographic prototype.

Bottom Line: I was specifically instructed not to purchase or to venerate any Nativity Icon that shows midwives bathing the Christ-Child as no midwives were needed.

I think this was not a very sound or wise instruction. I would ask whoever instructed you to explain why, and ask them if they are aware of the many famous and ancient examples all over the Orthodox world.

This is from the famous monastery of Ὅσιος Λουκᾶς in Greece, dating to the 11th century.

Hosios Loukas
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hosios_Loukas

Here is Andrei Rublev's Nativity of Jesus, 1405 A.D. (Cathedral of the Annunciation, Moscow Kremlin)

I've heard that the mid-wives are thought to foreshadow the baptism of our lord. Surely this would explain their portrayal in numerous icons?

I found these excerpts from a GOC-K blog:

"In the bottom right-hand corner of the icon Christ is shown being washed by two midwives. This washing scene is based on the apocryphal Gospels of Matthew and James and was the cause of some controversy in the eighteenth century. The dispute arose because the washing scene appears to suggest that the birth of Christ was according to nature. However, we know from the teaching of the Church that the Theotokos was a virgin before, during and after childbirth. In other words, the seal of her virginity remained even after childbirth and she gave birth without defilement and without the need for washing. This event was foretold by the Prophet Ezekiel: ‘This gate shall be shut, it shall not be opened, and no man shall enter in by it; because the Lord, the God of Israel, hath entered in by it, therefore it shall be shut’ (Ezekiel 44:2)."

"Most early icons depict this bathing scene and as long as it is correctly interpreted it is not a problem. The washing was part of Christ’s condescension to human custom in the same way as He underwent circumcision and baptism. This scene does not indicate any uncleanness, but teaches us that Christ became man in reality and not in just in appearance."

Source: http://brookwoodblogger.blogspot.com/20 ... -icon.html

I find this to be helpful, to me it can show that the GOC-Stephanos isn't completely wrong for condemning such icons.