There's no such thing as a "theology of hugging" -- but if there were, this would certainly be foundational:

Romans 16:3-16 (NRSV) 
    Greet Prisca and Aquila, who work with me in Christ Jesus, and who risked their necks for my life, to whom not only I give thanks, but also all the churches of the Gentiles. Greet also the church in their house. Greet my beloved Epaenetus, who was the first convert in Asia for Christ. Greet Mary, who has worked very hard among you. Greet Andronicus and Junia, my relatives who were in prison with me; they are prominent among the apostles, and they were in Christ before I was. Greet Ampliatus, my beloved in the Lord. Greet Urbanus, our co-worker in Christ, and my beloved Stachys. Greet Apelles, who is approved in Christ. Greet those who belong to the family of Aristobulus. Greet my relative Herodion. Greet those in the Lord who belong to the family of Narcissus. Greet those workers in the Lord, Tryphaena and Tryphosa. Greet the beloved Persis, who has worked hard in the Lord. Greet Rufus, chosen in the Lord; and greet his mother--a mother to me also. Greet Asyncritus, Phlegon, Hermes, Patrobas, Hermas, and the brothers and sisters who are with them. Greet Philologus, Julia, Nereus and his sister, and Olympas, and all the saints who are with them. Greet one another with a holy kiss. All the churches of Christ greet you.

The repetitious Greek term translated "greet" in this passage is aspazomai, from spao, meaning "to enfold in the arms" (sounds like hugging, doesn't it?).  And although the Apostle Paul urges the believers to greet one another with a "holy kiss", we must resist the temptation to read this anachronistically.

The nature of kissing may also differ in many cases from modern readers' expectations.  It is possible that the first Christian kisses of greeting, like many kisses in biblical tradition, were light kisses on the cheek.  But whether in an early period or a later one, it is likely that some kisses, especially in the Roman West, involved more. [C.S. Keener, "Kissing" in Dictionary of New Testament Background, p. 629]

In the ensuing centuries, such "holy kissing" did, in fact, become problematic.

Because the practice in its earliest form was probably not restricted to one's own gender (Tertullian Ad Ux. 2.4), it was sometimes abused, drawing condemnations of those who kissed a second time (Athenagoras Suppl. 32); eventually it was restricted to members of one's own gender (Apost. Const. 2.7.57). Such restrictions were important especially given false accusations the church combated, such as incest (Athenagoras Suppl. 3; Theophilus of Antioch Autol. 3.4; Minucious Felix Oct. 31.1; Tertullian Apol. 2.5, 20). [Ibid., p. 628]

It's also possible that Paul was already aware of the potential for abuse when it came to kissing, therefore modifying his exhortation: "greet one another with a holy kiss."

The addition of αγίω suggests a degree of solemnity, or a kiss reserved for fellow Christians or for particular occasions (liturgical = when they came together for worship, as part of their worship -- an act which marked the family bond of those who believed in Christ...). [ James D.G. Dunn Romans 9-16, WBC, p. 899]

I suppose that the moral weakness of our human nature is a common polemic when it comes to restricting or forbidding the practice of embracing or kissing (or both) within the body of Christ. Yet there is something about all this that seems disturbing.

Jesus regularly challenged the social mores of his time: interacting with women not related to him (Mk 14:1-9;Jn 4:1-30), even Gentile women (Mk 7:24-30), and sharing table fellowship with sinners (Mk 2:15-17).  From this alone, it seems obvious that we must allow for love to be expressed in ways that transcend socially (or religiously) oppressive mores, are free of religious legalism and hypocrisy, and yet also affirm human dignity, worth, and the imago dei that each person bears.

Okay. I can hear it already: "but what about all the people who don't like hugs to begin with? Not everyone is a hugger, you know." Yeah, yeah, yeah. Blah, blah, blah.  And lots of people can't even offer a decent handshake either!  Well, phooey on them!  We can't let the socially underdeveloped to determine what course of action the entire body of Christ should take, can we?  And just because there inevitably will be some pervert somewhere who wants a cheap thrill by hugging someone inappropriately doesn't mean we all stop hugging, or entirely change the way we hug -- does it?  Should it?

And yet there is much to be said for establishing "boundaries," and for engendering respect for the opposite gender.  This is especially true in an overly individualistic and amoral society where seemingly everything goes.  As it is, however, many believers understand and practice "love" in ways often quite different from the popular notions of love out in the general culture.  The world should be able to learn a thing or two about love and affection from we followers of Christ, don't you think?.

So then, how should we respond? Should we leave our hugging rules in place? Do away with hugs altogether? Relax our rules and encourage believers to become more discriminating huggers, learning to pull-back when called for?

.

I'd love to hear your thoughts as to how best to proceed.

... and I could probably use a hug  :)

.

POSTSCRIPT:  When it comes to the giving of hugs (and a sprinkling of handshakes), I couldn't be more proud of a congregation than the one I'm a part of.  They are extraordinarily good at being both genuine and appropriate in the way they show affection toward one another and anyone else who happens to be visiting.

.

image credit: © Galina Barskaya, iStockphoto.com