A Perspective Holding Two Truths: Addressing Misconceptions, and Naming Harm in the Divine Nine

Recently, I watched (most of) one of the latest viral videos in which a  former member of a Divine 9 (D9) sorority  is a guest on the “We Need to Talk” podcast. The episode is entitled, “Exposing the True Horrors of Sororities and Fraternities.” In this video, like in many of the other viral denouncing videos,  she is publicly discussing her denunciation of involvement in D9 organizations, and is making statements based on her belief that certain symbolic practices, including lighting candles, wearing robes, taking oaths, memorial rituals etc., are demonic. 

What stands out to me isn’t just the denunciation itself, but the apparent reasoning behind it: the idea that a ritual is spiritually dangerous based on what it looks like rather than what it means.

This raises an important question: Why can two sincere Christians look at the same symbolic practice and come to completely different conclusions about whether it is meaningful, neutral, or demonic? It reflects differences in how we as humans construct meaning, interpret Scripture, protect identity, and navigate power, culture, and history.

As a Black woman, life-long Christrian (raised in the Baptist church, baptized at 8 years old, and currently attends church virtually every Sunday in a whole other state by choice…shout out to Wheeler Avenue Baptist Church in Houston, TX!), who also happens to be an almost 20 year member of a Zeta Phi Beta Sorority, Inc., and holds degrees in psychology, sociology and a license as a mental health counselor, such discussions are important to me. 

In sociology symbolic interactionism is a concept that explains that objects, actions, and rituals do not carry inherent meaning. Instead, meaning is created, or constructed through social interaction and shared understanding within communities, such as religious groups, denominations, churches, ethnic groups or even service organizations like sororities and fraternities. Symbolic interactionism explains why a candle can represent prayer, remembrance, mourning, spiritual presence, or community solidarity, across various communities.  It also explains why the general public may look at a straw, and see a tool used to drink liquid from a cup, while some Black women may look at a straw, and see not just a drinking device, but a beauty tool used to achieve a “straw set” of tight curls. Its meaning depends on context.

This also lends insight as to why members of the D9 may understand certain practices as symbols of brotherhood/sisterhood, memorialization, historical continuity, and cultural identity, while former D9 members, as well as people who have never held membership in D9 organizations assign entirely different meanings. The conflict is not about the ritual itself.  It is about competing systems of meaning-making.

Hermeneutics is a term that refers to the different ways of reading and interpreting the Bible. Christians do not all interpret the Bible the same way. Separationist Hermeneutics emphasizes avoiding anything resembling practices that aren’t explicitly Christian or Biblical. Contextual or Incarnational Hermeneutics emphasizes intent and cultural context, and allows symbolic expression within faith. So, disagreement among Christians about the D9 may reflect how they are reading and interpreting the Bible, rather than the degree, or extent of their spiritual sincerity.

We all do our best to make meaning of things in our lives. It’s human nature to strive towards making things make sense. I think meaning-making carries another layer of importance within Black communities. Because of racism, we’ve partly developed our sense of meaning-making as a survival mechanism, whereas White Americans get the luxury of making meaning without the mental and emotional effects of being a historically oppressed and continuously marginalized group. I think this could also provide insight as to why several of the former D9 members who go to YouTube with their denunciation are also often connected to White conservative evangelical groups, and often appear coinciding with election seasons.

I think part of what is also important to reiterate in these conversations is that Scripture tells us to work out our salvation for ourselves, and not to judge other brothers and sisters in Christ for their personal convictions. I’ve been guilty of judging denouncers and lumping them into one group, and I take accountability for that. Some denouncers do so in a way that is respectful to, and actually edifies the body of Christ. They honor what the Lord has directly told them, and they live their life accordingly, without all the fanfare and hoopla. In my own study and interpretation of Scripture, this is a Christ-like example of how we are to handle moments of personal Spiritual conviction. 

Now, what I think some former D9 members sometimes misunderstand is, when the denunciation is placed on public platforms like YouTube, they are literally opening the door for public response. Everyone is not going to agree with their decision. And that’s ok. We also have to be a good steward of our free will and decision-making power that God has given us. While publicly sharing such videos may partially serve the purpose of discipleship,  it can also open the door for greater division in the body of Christ, which is what we have seen happen every single time one of these videos is posted. And we, the body of Christ, just don’t need that. 

Maybe YouTube is not the best medium for that. Maybe one on one witness to people who directly express interest to former D9 members is more effective and conducive to the fulfillment of the discipleship God has specifically called the former members to do. Or, if as former D9 members, you sincerely feel led to using platforms like YouTube, maybe let the focus be on how denouncing has liberated you and brought you closer to God, instead of allowing the focus to be on demonizing the organizations, and giving personalized interpretations and misinformation. Your witness is more powerful than your weaponization. Your witness does not need weaponization.  

I think it’s also important to examine historical context. Historically, Black Greek-letter organizations were founded to cultivate scholarship, leadership development, racial uplift, mutual aid and a social safe haven for Black college students post Reconstruction. They were not centered on harm. 

Many of the abusive practices associated with hazing that we’ve come to know of today were not part of the founders’ original framework. Over time, however, some practices emerged that departed from these intentions. Hazing did not originate within Black Greek-letter organizations alone. Initiation abuse across many institutions developed through borrowed hierarchical models. For example, many Black soldiers returning from military service during World Wars I and II and beyond, brought with them initiation models learned in boot camp environments, where endurance, submission to authority, and suffering were framed as character formation.

Predominantly white fraternities and sororities historically practiced hierarchical and exclusionary initiation rituals that emphasized control, power (financial, political and social), and loyalty testing. These models influenced broader Greek culture. Within Black communities navigating racial oppression, endurance and toughness were sometimes posited as survival strategies. Practices were intended to build resilience, such as those used during nonviolence workshops during the freedom riders movement are such an example.  In these workshops, participants acted out scenarios where they were taunted, pushed, spat on and threatened while learning to remain calm and not fight back. 

These practices were eventually distorted into systems of control within fraternity structures; not by force from organizational protocol, but as a by-product of free will and subsequent abuse of power by some of the individuals within the organizations. The unfortunate thing is, when some individuals wear the letters of an organization, their actions are going to be automatically associated with the whole organization, because our brains are wired for patterns and black or white thinking. It is easier to lump things together, than to more closely examine nuance. 

Unchecked authority can shift leadership from mentorship to domination. If we consider the zeitgeist of the organizational culture, coupled with the militaristic experience of Black soldiers, the racism that otherwise made them feel inferior anywhere other than within their own cultural hubs, fraternities were a hot bed and easy target for such practices to be developed as a means of achieving a sense of superiority, even if it meant doing so over their own people. This is a symptom of white supremacy. Giving this context does not excuse the harm, but it helps us increase our understanding of it.