For what it's worth, when a discussion like this turns up I always point out that people should look to Freemasons as a prime example of what happens when "rituals" and "secrets" of an organization are "leaked".

It happened to them, and still does as anyone curious enough can go to any library and find books about their rituals and whatnot, but the fact is, that organization is still going strong.

I think there are more more false issues and misconceptions about Greek life than just the rituals that keep people away.

I really dislike hazing, and I get irritated though whenever the media reports a hazing incident as "initiation rituals" when 99% of the time an actual "initiation or induction ceremony" have nothing in them that has to do with the hazing stunts people use during a hell week or other events......

MHO,
BG

Well, I think there's also a difference between preaching through a ritual versus acknowledging where the organization's values stem from.

I'm going to try to explain myself without revealing any aspects of my own Ritual, so hopefully it makes sense.

SigEp is not a religious Fraternity. But, SigEp was founded by students studying to become Baptist ministers. There are a few things in reference to our cardinal principles, VDBL (see siggy), that can be connected to some religious texts. But, I can say that I was never asked to pledge allegiance to a religion or anything of that nature.

So, if all of that was removed, a lot of the value would be lost.

All I have to say is it's not church. You aren't there to worship. As pshsx1 says, there is a difference between preaching and explaining the source of an organization's values. I doubt very seriously any group has a ritual that includes offensive material, but sourced material from the Bible or other religious texts may be uncomfortable for some members. We have discussed before whether fraternities required members to take an oath that they were Christians or believed in God. The same may occur in sororities. Individual conscience decides whether or not someone who does not believe in God or a member of another religion could make that oath without discomfort.

IMO, you can read a Bible verse and think "wow, that's an awesome thing to say" without believing in God. Jesus Christ is one of our exemplars, but so is Hermes. We don't require you to worship either one, we just think that some of their qualities are admirable.

This is part of the reason that Alpha Phi Omega added the oath to the pledge manual. http://www.apo-em.org/brotherhoodoath.htm

It's kind of interesting, but one of our most active chapters has a similar story to the OP. I don't know if they were ever a local originally, but they were part of a national, then split off from them when the majority of the chapter wanted to initiate women and they were told they couldn't. They stayed a local for a decent period of time before petitioning to join Psi U.

Well, that's when talking to proposed initiates (neophytes, pledges, or whatever anyone else's term is) prior to initiation is important. Swearing on a religious book, for example, doesn't necessarily men you're swearing to that religion. Sometimes there's just something in there like a pink catsuit reference that's really important (see 33girl's response below).

^^ This!

But surely you understand why that makes some people uncomfortable?

Actually, while many today surely see it as just an old-fashioned practice or just "how we do things," that is pretty close to what it means.

To swear is to make an oath, and an oath by definition is an appeal to a deity or something else that one considers sacred (one's honor, one's grandmother's grave, "all that is holy") as a witness or testament to the truth of what one is saying or to the binding nature of what one is promising. The meaning of placing one's hand on a sacred text is to invoke symbolically the deity/ies of whom that text speaks to witness the oath.

Exactly, Lionel de Rothschild, the first Jew elected to the Parliament of Great Britiain was refused to be seated (and re-elected anyway) because he refused to take the oath and the Christian Bible and using the standard form of the oath which was Christian Oath, this went on through 4 parliaments...

Sadly, the Dickinson chapter was only active as a Gamma Phi Beta chapter from 1980-1987. I wonder if any of the members kept things going "locally" after that point.
I do think that Gamma Phi Beta was a good fit for that chapter, if they sought a group without a religious affiliation.

Back to the point of the original post, there is another very interesting sorority chapter at Auburn University. In 1923 a local Phi Delta Rho was founded and in 1927 became a chapter of a small national, Phi Alpha Chi. In 1928 that national merged with another small national to form Sigma Phi Beta. In 1933 the new national was absorbed into Phi Omega Pi so it acquired that name. In 1946 since there was already a very strong chapter of Delta Zeta on campus when Phi Omega Pi was absorbed by DZ, like a few other chapters they determined to seek another national and elected to join Alpha Omicron Pi. So if an original member was an enthusistic alumna and elected to join each change in organizations she would have had five different sorority pens, making a pretty cool bracelet if she chose to use them that way! I don't know the details of the DZ merger but it is possible that the alumnae had an option of joining either AOPi or DZ. I've always thought the above a very unique sorority chapter story.

Not necessarily. Just because people aren't piping up about it on a public internet forum doesn't mean chapters don't have appropriate, and private, conversations about what to expect with pledges/new members/whatever. They might or they might not.

I agree, that is a very interesting story. I doubt anyone followed through on all those changes, though.

mhm, that's what I'm getting at.

And I really want to get more into my logic for what I said about swearing an oath, but I can't. :/ *lips sealed* <3