Performing Family: Ritual Kissing and the Construction of Early Christian Kinship*

Performing Family: Ritual Kissing and the Construction of Early Christian Kinship*

Michael Penn

------

Abstract: Early Christians described and performed the ritual kiss in ways that helped them create a cohesive, family-like community. The kiss could include certain people in the church, exclude others, and help distinguish Christian behavior. An investigation of the ritual kiss presents an opportunity to illustrate how performance theory's emphasis on embodied action can help us better appreciate how practice, as well as rhetoric, affected early Christian communities.

Among scholars of early Christianity, interest in the Greco-Roman family has reached an unprecedented level. Recent studies from classics have enhanced our understanding of the Greco-Roman family and its use as a metaphor in the politics of empire. 1 At the same time, crossdisciplinary [End Page 151] research in early Christian studies has inherited from anthropology a focus on the family as a primary social and cultural unit. 2 The result is an impressive list of scholarly monographs, articles, and anthologies analyzing the family's place in New Testament and Patristic literature. 3

These works have come to a consensus, of sorts, that early Christian writers used familial rhetoric and fictive kinship terms (e.g., "brothers and sisters in Christ") to strengthen the cohesion of early Christian groups. 4 Several studies have suggested that the Greco-Roman family, especially the figure of the paterfamilias, also provided early Christian writers with a useful metaphor of hierarchy. 5 Although these investigations have yielded important insights regarding the ways Christian writers used models of family, because they center on the question of how early Christians wrote or spoke of their communities, these scholars have limited themselves to [End Page 152] exploring only the verbal and written rhetoric of kinship. Building on this scholarship, I want to examine a slightly different dynamic—how early Christians used a specific ritual, that of ritual kissing, to help perform family.

Recent scholarship in ritual studies, performance studies, and queer theory has emphasized performance as a key factor in identity formation. 6 What links such diverse fields is the belief that a focus on the performative and the language of performativity offers a perspective otherwise lacking in our analysis. Performance theory is partly a reaction against the expansion of the term text to include just about any human activity. 7 Performance theorists often suggest that "texts may obscure what performance tends to reveal," and they try to reclaim the physical and emphasize the kinesthetic. 8 As a metaphor, the very term performance changes our vocabulary and shifts our analytic attention. Audience, script, participation, framing—all become central concerns. Performance also stresses dynamism instead of simple expression. Cultural performances do not just reflect an abstract hidden cultural system (they are not simply texts that describe), they also create, reproduce, or challenge that system. 9 [End Page 153]

My own work employs insights from these fields to investigate how early Christians constructed the ritual kiss not only as a means to talk about being a family but also as a way to act it out. I suggest that the adoption and modification of a typical familial gesture into a decidedly Christian ritual helped early Christians redefine the concept of family. This concentration on the kiss as ritual performance challenges scholars to view early Christian discourse as denser and richer than if we limit ourselves to models that focus solely on the verbal or the written. It looks at action as well as rhetoric, emphasizes the power of participation, raises questions of intended audience, examines the importance of self-representation, and presents rituals as constitutive as well as expressive.

There remains, however, an important distinction between most work in performance studies and my exploration of early Christianity. Scholarship of performance usually focuses on modern rituals where the author witnesses the performance itself. In historical studies, however, we rarely have so thick a description as direct observation. Instead, we are limited to what extant writing and iconography tell us about ancient rituals. Unlike other investigations of the performative, scholarship of early Christianity does not have the luxury to move quite so far away from the text.

In his work on performance and memory, Joseph Roach makes a similar point when he states: "The pursuit of performance does not require historians to abandon the archive, but it does encourage them to spend more time in the streets." 10 The difference, of course, is that the streets I walk down are not those of present-day New Orleans but a reconstruction of ancient Rome. As a result, my own work does not discard texts as much as it moves in and out of them. I analyze texts to approximate Christian and non-Christian kissing practices; I examine how Christians modified these practices in their construction of the Christian ritual kiss; and I explore how Christian kissing praxis (both the kiss's performance and its rhetorical framing—its staging and its scripting) may have affected early Christian communities.

My investigation begins with a short chronological overview of ritual kissing in early Christianity. Next, I briefly examine the kiss's use as a familial gesture among non-Christians. I then explore three ways early Christian leaders combined the widespread familial connotations of kissing with the specifics of Christian ritual performance to influence emerging Christian communities. I focus on: (1) how the act of exchanging a kiss helped early Christians characterize their community as a family; (2) [End Page 154] how the exaltation of individuals who refused to kiss non-Christian relatives modeled the use of religious affiliation instead of biological filiation as the primary kinship marker; and (3) how the restraint shown in the ways Christians kissed reinforced early Christian claims to moral superiority. In each of these cases, the kiss functioned as a performance both of inclusivity and exclusivity; it helped define who was part of a new, familial community and it differentiated these family members from everyone else.

Ritual Kissing and Early Christianity

As attested by the oldest known Christian writings, kissing was one of the most ubiquitous features of early Christianity. It was practiced throughout the ancient world by both so-called orthodox and heretical Christians and became a part of almost every major Christian ritual. In the first five centuries of the common era, Christians kissed each other as part of prayer, Eucharist, baptism, and ordination and in connection with funerals, monastic vows, martyrdom, and penitential practices. Yet despite the hundreds of ancient references to the Christian kiss, most modern scholarship has ignored this important component of early Christian worship. 11

In the New Testament, commandments for Christians to exchange a [End Page 155] kiss appear at the end of 1 Thessalonians, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Romans, and 1 Peter. All occur at the close of an epistle and are virtually identical in their wording: "Greet one another" (or 1 Thessalonians, "Greet all the brethren") "with a holy kiss" (or 1 Peter, "with a kiss of love"). 12 The brevity of these references and their lack of specific details suggest that Paul and the author of 1 Peter assumed that their audiences were already familiar with the kiss.

By the end of the second century, surviving sources witness early Christians ritually kissing each other in Asia Minor, Rome, Athens, and Alexandria. 13 Justin presents the only specific example of the kiss's place in the service order, and he puts the ritual kiss at the end of the common prayer and before the Eucharist. First- and second-century sources do not limit the exchange of the kiss to same-sex participants, and late-second-century works indicate that men and women kissed each other. 14 These works also show that, like most examples of Greco-Roman kissing, 15 the Christian ritual kiss was a kiss on the lips.

Third-century sources further document the ritual kiss's ubiquity and present several important developments in its practice. By C.E. 300, writings from Rome, Athens, Alexandria, Carthage, North Africa, Asia Minor, [End Page 156] and Syria all speak of ritual kissing between Christians. 16 These writings link the kiss with prayer, Eucharist, baptism, ordination, martyrdom, domestic devotions, greeting, and reconciliation. The works also show important variations in how community members exchange the kiss, and show emerging ecclesiastical hierarchy's attempts to regulate ritual kissing. Tertullian and The Apostolic Tradition limit the kiss to baptized Christians; Tertullian states that some heretical Christians do not follow this distinction. 17 Although most early Christian sources indicate that the kiss is on the lips, the Acts of Andrew and the Acts of John modify it to be a kiss of the feet or hands. 18 In contrast to previous texts that allowed women and men to exchange the kiss with each other, The Apostolic Tradition is the first source specifically to prohibit this practice. 19

Fourth-century works speak of the ritual kiss as part of prayer, Eucharist, baptism, ordination, penitence, martyrdom, and epistolary salutations. 20 These sources also hint at geographic variations in the kiss's position in the Eucharist liturgy and whether the bishop kisses the initiate [End Page 157] immediately after baptism. Similar to The Apostolic Tradition, The Apostolic Constitutions limits the kiss to those of the same gender. 21 Like the Apocryphal Acts, the pseudo-Clementine Second Letter on Virginity no longer has opposite-sexed Christians exchange a labial kiss. 22 The Apostolic Constitutions specifies that clergy only kiss other clergy and laity other laity. 23 The Testament of Our Lord also supports this division. 24

Fifth-century sources continue to display an increased diversity in early Christian kissing practices. They indicate shifts in the kiss's position within the Eucharist service, differences between Eastern and Western liturgical practices, and a proliferation of the kiss's connection to other rituals. By the century's end, the kiss appears as a part of the closing of prayers, the Eucharist, baptism, ordination, martyrdom, the cult of martyrs, greetings, monastic vows, home devotions, saluting the altar, epistolary conventions, and death rituals. 25

Although even a brief overview of the ritual kiss raises numerous questions regarding its practice and connections with community identity and social boundaries, this article focuses on only one aspect of these relationships—the kiss's performance as a way to define Christianity as family. Before further exploring the Christian ritual kiss, however, it first is necessary to examine non-Christian use of the kiss as a familial gesture. The adoption and modification of these contemporary kissing customs became a central concern for early Christian leaders. [End Page 158]

Kissing and the Greco-Roman Family

The Greco-Roman world often associated kissing with familial relations. In a survey of almost nine hundred non-Christian Greek and Latin references to kissing, familial kisses constituted the second largest category, surpassed only by kisses between unmarried lovers. 26 These familial kisses included those between parents and children (60 percent), spouses (26 percent), siblings (9 percent), and more extended family (5 percent). Although the surviving sources rarely speak of what body part was kissed, those that do suggest that the familial kiss most often was a kiss on the lips. 27

According to classical literature, relatives not only were allowed to kiss each other, they were expected to do so. Latin writers often refer to this as the ius osculi. In his elegies, Propertius lists the various people who have the right to kiss his lover, including male and female relatives. 28 The narrator of Ovid's Amores complains that he has to kiss his lover secretly, but her husband can demand these kisses as his right. 29 Ovid later shows this from the opposite perspective, a husband proclaiming that his rights have been infringed when his wife kissed another man. 30 Ovid's Metamorphoses notes that siblings often kiss in public, a custom Byblis uses to conceal an incestuous relationship with her brother. 31 Suetonius states that Agrippina seduced her uncle, "aided by the ius osculi." 32 [End Page 159]

Several writers justify a man's traditional right publicly to kiss female relatives as a "spot breath check": it ensures that women are not stealing the family wine. 33 For example, Athenaeus states:

It is impossible for a women to drink wine unnoticed. For, first, a woman does not have control of [the store] of wine. Next, she must kiss her and her husband's relatives down to the children of second cousins, and do this every day whenever she first sees them. Finally, because it is unclear whom she will meet, she is on her guard for if she only tastes [of the wine] there is no need of further accusation. 34

Gellius and Pliny present similar descriptions of this custom. 35 Tertullian also cites this tradition and laments that in contrast to ancient Rome, in his day "on account of wine, there is no free kiss." 36 Of course it seems unlikely that any of these authors knew the origins of the publicly exchanged familial kiss. Instead, they shape their explanations of a contemporary practice to help forward their own narrative project, whether that project be Athenaeus' discussion of the evils of excessive drink or Tertullian's depiction of declining Roman morals.

Non-Christian sources occasionally use the familial kiss to describe nonfamilial relationships. In Apuleius' The Golden Ass, the narrator "embraced Mithras, the priest and now my father, clinging to his neck and kissing him many times." 37 Unfortunately, the kiss's role in this text is far from clear. Although presented in Apuleius' discussion of the Isis rites, the kiss does not occur during the initiation ritual itself but several days later and in the context of expressing gratitude; most likely it is a kiss of thanksgiving, a well-attested Greco-Roman gesture. 38 The phrase "the priest and now my father" is also vague: Does the narrator interpret his kiss primarily as a familial kiss (Mithras is now his father), a religious kiss [End Page 160] (Mithras is a priest), or as a combination of these? Of course, there also remains the often raised question of how closely Apuleius' descriptions represent actual practices. Nevertheless, Apuleius' narrative implies a connection between kissing and a religious group's use of familial imagery. A less ambiguous example of the kiss's use in discussions of fictive kinship occurs in the Satyricon when Circe calls Encolpius' lover his "brother" and offers herself as his new "sister" (that is, sexual partner). Encolpius must only kiss her to recognize this new relationship, which comes with the same sort of sexual benefits his "brother" currently provides. 39

Kissing in late antiquity was associated with many different circumstances and with many different relationships. This larger cultural context becomes essential for understanding the ritual kiss's various roles in early Christian communities. Because one of its most prominent meanings was a link with kinship (whether biological or fictive), it is not surprising that the ritualized exchange of kisses between group members appeared in a community, like early Christianity, that tried to emphasize a familial structure.

Creating a Christian Family

Although previous scholars have not explored Christianity's employment of familial gestures, many have analyzed early Christians' use of familial nomenclature. Applying kinship terms not to biological relations but to those connected by faith, early Christians tried to redefine family. As exemplified by Matthew 12.46-50, the family of Christian fellowship superseded even biological ties. 40 For the ancient church, such analogies not only described but also prescribed. Comparing the ancient Christian community to the family emphasized the group's strength and unity; such a label could become self-fulfilling.

Early Christian descriptions of the ritual kiss became part of this larger project of constructing early Christians as kin. Many Christian authors explicitly state that the Christian ritual kiss is like a kiss between relatives. Writing in the second century, Athenagoras warns that, when kissing, "it [End Page 161] is of great importance to us that the bodies of our brothers and sisters and the others called the names of relatives, remain not insulted and undefiled." 41 In the early third century, Tertullian suggests that, unlike the Christian husband who recognizes that kissing fellow Christians is analogous to kissing blood relatives, a pagan husband would misinterpret his wife's attempts "to crawl into prison to kiss the martyr's bonds" or "to meet any of the brethren to [give] the kiss." 42 In the early fifth century, Augustine employs the language of kinship to proclaim, "your lips draw near the lips of your brother in the same way that your heart does not withdraw from his heart." 43

In their alignment of the familial and the ritual kiss, these sources allude to many different types of relationships. Nevertheless, there remains an intriguing silence when they do not mention an integral member of many ancient households—the slave. Among non-Christian sources, there are many allusions to kissing slaves for sexual pleasure, 44 yet a free person and slave kissing for nonsexual reasons was seen as extremely unusual. For example, in the Satyricon, Encolpius is surprised when a slave he helped runs up to kiss him, 45 and in his Epistles, Seneca notes that he purposefully flouts social expectations when he greets other people's slaves with a kiss on the hands. 46 In contrast, Christian sources never place any restriction on exchanging the ritual kiss with a Christian slave, 47 and the Martyrdom of Perpetua claims that, previous to their execution, the martyrs of Carthage kissed each other, an exchange that would have included the slave Felicitas. 48 In other words, both in its performance and its description, the ritual kiss temporarily erased status distinctions that [End Page 162] Christians otherwise maintained in their household arrangements; at least when they exchanged the ritual kiss, slaves, too, became full members of the Christian family.