MennoNet.com

Hats Off wrote:It is really discouraged that men hug men at funerals or visitation.

Why? It hardly seems to me that Mennonite culture needs a push in the direction of greater stoicism.[/quote]

Signtist wrote:

Hats Off wrote:It is really discouraged that men hug men at funerals or visitation.

Why? It hardly seems to me that Mennonite culture needs a push in the direction of greater stoicism.

Cooties?

Sorry couldn't resist. Seriously I've seen many styles of greetings from many different cultures from kissing to handshakes to belching (I think that last was confined to the males of one family but it was something they did frequently as a greeting).

Some of the reasons for the greetings were to be Scripturally compliant. Some had to do with customs of hygiene related to illness or lice. Other reasons have been lost to the mists of time. I've learned to just follow the local custom and not to question it (when in Rome... )

Bootstrap wrote:

Ernie wrote:Plus, kissing is not a sign of affection or warmness. It is an act of obedience.

What do you think it symbolizes? "Greet one another with a holy kiss" implies some kind of welcoming and greeting. Handshakes, hugs, mediterranean kisses all seem to involve affection and warmth. The word used for kiss, φιλήματι, is closely related to various words for love (φιλέω, etc).

I'm talking about CA men today. I'm not talking about society in general or what was originally understood.

Ernie wrote:

Bootstrap wrote:

Ernie wrote:Plus, kissing is not a sign of affection or warmness. It is an act of obedience.

What do you think it symbolizes? "Greet one another with a holy kiss" implies some kind of welcoming and greeting. Handshakes, hugs, mediterranean kisses all seem to involve affection and warmth. The word used for kiss, φιλήματι, is closely related to various words for love (φιλέω, etc).

I'm talking about CA men today. I'm not talking about society in general or what was originally understood.

Ah, I'm sorry. I read your post out of context. But to me, obedience to this command would involve greeting, warmth, and affection. If I were starting a new church, I would rather see affectionate hugs that express this than ritualized kisses done out of obedience to the letter of the law.

From Page 1:

KingdomBuilder wrote:My rural (Protestant) congregation is very keen on hugging.
Interestingly, everyone hugs. Not just male-to-male.
A bit off topic, but thought I'd share anyways.

i visited an MCUSA church, was hugged (it felt like the entire time) .. when i consider returning, the hugs .. no, too much. hugs can be over-done.

i have never witnessed the Holy Kiss, only read about it on this forum.
in the past, some (male) forum members were not at all comfortable with the Holy Kiss.
i'm not sure if i could become accustomed to the idea. i've read about it, but it's pretty far from my experience, even to witness. i understand the scriptural custom, i understand the discomfort.

in its place, the hug, or side kiss (cheeks) seems generally easier to accept. it's done in various cultures, it's something "people see" being done by various religious leaders and/or political leaders in formal world meetings. i.e., it's not quite as (exotic.)

joshuabgood wrote:Germanic stoicism accounts for quite a bit of the "nonhugging."

Generally I am in favor of hugging and I think the kiss of brotherhood is also an appropriately affectionate greeting. (not on the lips...on the cheek)

Josh

Absolutely.

For men to kiss each other on the lips has never seemed right to me. I've never said much about it, because in the circles I came from there were always people who believed that that was the only proper way to practice it.

Megachurch debuts side-hug cam
http://babylonbee.com/news/megachurch-d ... e-hug-cam/

LAKESIDE, IL—Leaders at Paradox Church confirmed Thursday the recent debut of its “Side-Hug Cam,” a video camera that scans the crowd after the opening worship song to encourage participants to engage one another with a Christian side hug, which is then displayed on the church’s massive jumbotron.

“The popularity of the ‘Kiss Cam’ during professional sporting events has proven to be an effective way to get the crowd to participate,” Lead Cultural Relevance Director Preston McCauley told reporters. “We’re redeeming that secular technology to help our church to fulfill the godly tradition of greeting one another with a Christian side hug at each gathering of the local body.”

So far, leaders claim the response has been overwhelmingly positive. “We’ve noted an especially enthusiastic response from our singles’ ministry.”

Extra ushers will be on hand to break up any side hug that becomes too intimate, church sources confirmed.

Bootstrap wrote:...to me, obedience to this command would involve greeting, warmth, and affection. If I were starting a new church, I would rather see affectionate hugs that express this than ritualized kisses done out of obedience to the letter of the law.

It might not have been on purpose, but may I suggest that you have presented an inaccurate dichotomy; some of our circles witness and partake in kissing that is unquestionably warm and affectionate without being inappropriate or ritualistically formal.

Heirbyadoption wrote:

Bootstrap wrote:...to me, obedience to this command would involve greeting, warmth, and affection. If I were starting a new church, I would rather see affectionate hugs that express this than ritualized kisses done out of obedience to the letter of the law.

It might not have been on purpose, but may I suggest that you have presented an inaccurate dichotomy; some of our circles witness and partake in kissing that is unquestionably warm and affectionate without being inappropriate or ritualistically formal.

Taken out of context, my statement looks like it implies something in general about the people who do this. But if you look at the original context, I was responding to a message that said this:

Plus, kissing is not a sign of affection or warmness. It is an act of obedience.

I also focused mostly on issues involving warmth and affection and awkwardness in the kind of churches I have been part of. Plain people aren't the only people who struggle with awkwardness and appropriateness in how we express greeting, warmth, and affection.

I think we clarified a lot of this during the course of the thread. It's not helpful to pull this quote out of context. On the other hand, it's good to know that some in your circles witness and partake in kissing that is unquestionably warm and affectionate without being inappropriate or ritualistically formal. I would think that's the best way to apply this scripture if you do it with a literal kiss.

Personally, I don't have a problem with adjusting the gesture to fit the local culture. I think this has come up in other threads - some people think it's really important to express things with the same literal symbol, especially for things that have become identity issues for your particular group. I feel that way for foot washing, communion, baptism, and some other things. I wouldn't have put a kiss on this list. If I did, I'm not sure the text specifies only men to men and women to women, and I really don't know what they did back then. This particular symbol isn't part of my heritage and isn't something I've put a lot of priority on.