Changes to the Membership Application....

Aqua wrote: Sounds understandable, but to come up with such a plan.. did take quite some minding about it I guess eh?

The application is an ever changing document...

This is the third or fourth incarnation of the application under my watch...

The application runs until something pops up..

The last change involved some wording clarifications (and has seemed to help) and order of the questions for better "flow"...



My first adjustment was to ask for a little more information and refine what we were asking...

It'll change again down the road....

Interestingly that was the problem I had with moving the Oath. Despite appearing obvious, the problem with the Oath where it was, wasn't the location IMO it was the filtering of people who were taking it. I think people were taking it slot into the IP pipeline - which I don't think was/should be the purpose.

You saying that people were just "ticking boxes" right?

Its why we moved it...

People were "ticking boxes" for "this rank" or "that rank"....

And not taking due consideration in the posting of their oath...

So now, the oath is a requirement to bevome an Initiate, and apprenticeship eligibility...[/quote]

That is what the IP was meant to be, originally. An application of sorts, in order to avoid people showing up, asking for a master, and never coming back again....

Still is if you ask me...

Everything we for, is a "right of passage" to the next....

public statement like the oath, whether its consequences are fully understood or not, whether it is taken lightly or not, is a far more powerful thing than any application or exercise completion will ever be.

Well...

Emotionally, yes...

But technically, legally, no....

Say what you will, but as a legal entity, who has a legally recognizable members, an application is a more reliable thing....

I can see the that an oath, could be seen that way... But, less so, in my thinking...

Unfortunately with no-one reading the blasted proposed material, idiot "poets" making legal threats, plus other concerns and changes, it never saw the light.

Yet....

.... hasn't seen the light, yet...

Its not "try/fail/give up", its "try/fail/adjust/try again"...

ren wrote:

Maybe keep Temple Members unrelated to IP progress etc, and instead just require a new specific application for intention to work towards Apprenticeship, rather then those just here to work for self development (in whatever form it may take).

That is what the IP was meant to be, originally. An application of sorts, in order to avoid people showing up, asking for a master, and never coming back again....

The problem with the IP is that ideally it shouldn't reward anyone with any sort of rank. Being a member (identifying as a Jedi) and then an apprentice (becoming a knight) are the true beasts. We tried to create a growing membership by having a streamlined and rank-rewarding early experience (registration>application>IPstart>IPend) . It was achieved but the cost is high.

I still don't understand why the oath was "moved" (no longer required to be a member/jedi) while the application remained. A public statement like the oath, whether its consequences are fully understood or not, whether it is taken lightly or not, is a far more powerful thing than any application or exercise completion will ever be.

To go back to the IP, when I was working on it, it was my hope to see it become more modular, with "themes" so to speak, from which students could choose exercises and direction. This way I feel it would have been more interesting for the student, and more "appetizing" for potential masters... And more in line with the original goal of the IP being to pave the way to a successful apprenticeship.
Unfortunately with no-one reading the blasted proposed material, idiot "poets" making legal threats, plus other concerns and changes, it never saw the light.

Mm.. I will repeat myself, with different words I guess. First a question, Is Novice and Initiate the same rank? Or does it say two different ranks? If it is the same ``novice`` rank, then I would like to see the novice and initiate rank clustered together. Just like with the two different codes in our doctrine. Initiate as an 'next step' within the novice rank.
If the Initiate is 'higher' than novice, I would like to know why.


The oath is moved because people saw it as a way to become apprentice, rather than becoming member. A second option would have been to change the code in form itself, as I have suggested in a other post in this topic. T repeat my own words different:

Aqua: ,,Does oath change value of rank? Does rank change value of oath? And how to deal with it?''

Jestor wrote:

Aqua wrote: Sounds understandable, but to come up with such a plan.. did take quite some minding about it I guess eh?

The application is an ever changing document...

This is the third or fourth incarnation of the application under my watch...

The application runs until something pops up..

The last change involved some wording clarifications (and has seemed to help) and order of the questions for better "flow"...



My first adjustment was to ask for a little more information and refine what we were asking...

It'll change again down the road....

How can it change again, if it is the application is an ever changing document, if the application is part of the whole then so are we? Ah.. that is where the fun joins! Haha, when we are no longer able to change a situation - we are challenged to change ourselves. Jediism is just like it?
Not able to change ourselves, change the way we see it (example the application) When we do not change 'the world' we will change? Fun to say to change again, I wonder in what context you try to say. The self, or what is considered not the self. Do not mind to much about what I say, funny Jestor.. so many ways to read your posts. :side:

Well...

Emotionally, yes...

But technically, legally, no....

Say what you will, but as a legal entity, who has a legally recognizable members, an application is a more reliable thing....

I can see the that an oath, could be seen that way... But, less so, in my thinking...

The oath is a religious thing. Jedi have had an oath since jediism began, just look at the original maxims. Things have changed, but oaths were there....

Totjo has historically made no difference between a member and a Jedi, assuming all members are Jedi (they have taken an oath to that affect after all ) and all Jedi are members (mmmm not so sure about this one ). Just because the difference wasn't being made on paper, doesn't mean it isn't there.
And in the end, it's not more members that you want, it's more jedi.

I honestly don't think any Jedi should put any kind of value in being a member of the order/corporation. Being a member should only be a sort of by-product of doing things at totjo... Even with the current setup, what it should be seen as is "you are given greater roles and responsibilities because we know you". Seen from this angle, the only people who actually would need to be "application processed" are knights and clergy. (or any others who serve the order/corporation in some form)

I don't know how other churches operate, but I doubt many require such a large application to consider someone a member at such an early stage. Instead, they have some kind of ceremony (baptism?), and when looking at christian practices, it seems to start off with "accept jesus loves you and died for your sins", not with "where do you live, where were you born, what is your job, how well educated are you, and what are your crimes"...

I don't know how other churches operate, but I doubt many require such a large application to consider someone a member at such an early stage. Instead, they have some kind of ceremony (baptism?), and when looking at christian practices, it seems to start off with "accept jesus loves you and died for your sins", not with "where do you live, where were you born, what is your job, how well educated are you, and what are your crimes"...

Nope...

Run down to your local church...

They ask you to come sit in a few services and get a feel, see if it is something you like...

Then, they ask you to fill out some basic paperwork, name, members of the family's names, parents names, address, phone, previous church, why are you interested, and most likely a few other questions...

Then baptism, in the case of the Catholics...

I joined a Catholic Church when I was in my early thirties, I had to be a member for my child to attend the school...

And, yes, the church ask me those questions, the school had a hole other set of papers to fill out and answer... Their files did not cross...

I had belonged to this Church as a child, been baptized and confirmed in that church in that very altar... Took religion classes in that school at night because I didnt have religion classes in my normal schooling... Married my current wife in that church as well...

Went to the rectory and studied with the priest in my youth, as well as he came to our house and taught my sister and myself one on one there....

Lets say I am a bit familiar with that church... lol...

Yes, I had to 'fill out an application', and as I was 'already catholic', with baptismal papers in THEIR files, I still had to have an application to the Parrish...

They didnt make me get rebaptised, but, they wanted the certificates (copies) I had for it...

They wanted more personal information than TOTJO asks for...

And as we are internet based, our questions are a bit different...

++++++++++++++++
Because there is no 'big book of Jedi', like their is for Catholics... No heritage (yet), we allow anyone to 'legally' become a Jedi, with an application, just as I filled one out to join that church/Parrish...

So, we assume that all have been 'baptized by fire' and realized that this religion makes the most sense...

Fill out an application, boom, you are a member of TOTJO... "You have already been calling yourself a Jedi, right?"

Totjo has historically made no difference between a member and a Jedi, assuming all members are Jedi

Yes...

(they have taken an oath to that affect after all )

No, becasue the met the requirements for membership as defined by TOTJO, which did include the Oath, now does not...

and all Jedi are members(mmmm not so sure about this one ).

lol, no, not this one...

There are many jedi who are not members of TOTJO....

Just because the difference wasn't being made on paper, doesn't mean it isn't there.
And in the end, it's not more members that you want, it's more jedi.

Yes, quality, not quantity...

We are working on that...

Such as the waiting period...

Actually, the difference between the two is on 'paper'... Everyone can be a Jedi... It requires an application to be a TOTJO Jedi...

I honestly don't think any Jedi should put any kind of value in being a member of the order/corporation. Being a member should only be a sort of by-product of doing things at totjo... Even with the current setup, what it should be seen as is "you are given greater roles and responsibilities because we know you". Seen from this angle, the only people who actually would need to be "application processed" are knights and clergy. (or any others who serve the order/corporation in some form)

Campbell said, "

Joseph Campbell once said to his students at Sarah Lawrence College, “If you really want to help this world, what you will have to teach is how to live in it.” That’s what he taught. Over the last two summers of his life, in hours of conversations recorded in the library of Lucasfilm in California, we talked about how mythology can still awaken a sense of awe, gratitude and even rapture. Why myths? Why should we care about myths? What do they have to do with my life?

JOSEPH CAMPBELL: "Well, my first answer would be, well, go on, live your life, it’s a good life, you don’t need this. I don’t believe in being interested in subjects because they’re said to be important and interesting. I believe in being caught by it somehow or other. But you may find that with a proper introduction, this subject will catch you.

And so what can it do for you when it does catch you? These bits of information from ancient times, which have to do with the themes that have supported man’s life, built civilizations, informed religions over the millennia, have to do with deep inner problems, inner mysteries, inner thresholds of passage and if you don’t know what the guide signs are along the way, you have to work it out yourself. But once this catches you, there is always such a feeling from one or another of these traditions of information, of a deep, rich life-vivifying sort, that you won’t want to give it up."

Its how I respond to people when they ask me, "why should they join?"

I tell them, "you dont have to... Join in the conversations, hang out, do your thing... No one (Disney? lol) jhold the rights to stop you from calling yourself a Jedi, keep doing what you are doing...

But, if you are interested, and think this might benefit you, go ahead and join as well...

Its why I chuckle when people say, "oh thank you for accepting my application"... My response is, "No, thank you for joining TOTJO... Without the members, we would be three or four old men sitting around yelling at each other"... lol...


++++++++++++++++++++++
Yes, it kinda sucks that people sometimes just join to 'call themselves Jedi'...

But as I keep saying, we are working on that...

Aqua wrote: How can it change again, if it is the application is an ever changing document

Because 'permeance' is a matter of perspective...

YOu have never seen it change, therefore a change to you is something out of the norm... For me, I have changed it 3-4 times...

I change my socks every day, becasue they become wore out... I change my vehicles evry 10-15 years, becasue they get wore out...

'Nothing is permanent except change"..

so many ways to read your posts

So many ways to read everything.... :lol:...

ren wrote: I don't know how other churches operate, but I doubt many require such a large application to consider someone a member at such an early stage. Instead, they have some kind of ceremony (baptism?), and when looking at christian practices, it seems to start off with "accept jesus loves you and died for your sins", not with "where do you live, where were you born, what is your job, how well educated are you, and what are your crimes"...

Hi! As someone who lives in a place where there are more churches than sinners, I can assure you that nothing in this paragraph is true in the majority of the region in which I live, which is larger than most European countries.

Salvation, Baptism, and Church Membership are all C O M P L E T E L Y separate things in this region's Christian churches, and in order to be a proper member of a church, you need all three, in order. Otherwise, you're just a visitor and have no say in any church decisions and have little access to members-only church functions and programs.

steamboat28 wrote:

ren wrote: I don't know how other churches operate, but I doubt many require such a large application to consider someone a member at such an early stage. Instead, they have some kind of ceremony (baptism?), and when looking at christian practices, it seems to start off with "accept jesus loves you and died for your sins", not with "where do you live, where were you born, what is your job, how well educated are you, and what are your crimes"...

Hi! As someone who lives in a place where there are more churches than sinners, I can assure you that nothing in this paragraph is true in the majority of the region in which I live, which is larger than most European countries.

Salvation, Baptism, and Church Membership are all C O M P L E T E L Y separate things in this region's Christian churches, and in order to be a proper member of a church, you need all three, in order. Otherwise, you're just a visitor and have no say in any church decisions and have little access to members-only church functions and programs.

I think it's a cultural difference.. I went to a few churches as a kid/teenager (one baptist, three Church of England), and there was never any restriction on those who weren't 'members'.

Edan wrote:

steamboat28 wrote:

ren wrote: I don't know how other churches operate, but I doubt many require such a large application to consider someone a member at such an early stage. Instead, they have some kind of ceremony (baptism?), and when looking at christian practices, it seems to start off with "accept jesus loves you and died for your sins", not with "where do you live, where were you born, what is your job, how well educated are you, and what are your crimes"...

Hi! As someone who lives in a place where there are more churches than sinners, I can assure you that nothing in this paragraph is true in the majority of the region in which I live, which is larger than most European countries.

Salvation, Baptism, and Church Membership are all C O M P L E T E L Y separate things in this region's Christian churches, and in order to be a proper member of a church, you need all three, in order. Otherwise, you're just a visitor and have no say in any church decisions and have little access to members-only church functions and programs.

I think it's a cultural difference.. I went to a few churches as a kid/teenager (one baptist, three Church of England), and there was never any restriction on those who weren't 'members'.

Not at a service...

That is for everyone...

I didn't mean just at services...

lol...

Ah, my bad...

Well, same here... Basically...

We deny no one anything... The only reason we made some things member only is to stop the trolls from creating too much havoc...

And perhaps a couple for our more over-curious guests from stressing some of our more sensitive members...

++++++++++++++
I am getting ready to hit send, and I thought...

I think it's a cultural difference.. I went to a few churches as a kid/teenager (one baptist, three Church of England), and there was never any restriction on those who weren't 'members'.

Can I ask you to what you mean then?

YOu cannot celebrate the Eucharist, nor be confirmed/baptized...

Other than a ceremony, where a non-,member would of course be welcome as a guest, or a feast, where a non-member might be invited by someone, seldom do non-members attend any of the ceremonies, unless it concerns family...

I am seriously trying to come up with something...

Just a clarification. A seven day waiting period to cut down on the number of impulse-applications. We want the ones that apply to want it bad enough to wait a week before applying for membership. In the mean time, thy may operate as guests without any other hindrance.

No issues with that at all. If we find that i causes an unforseen problem, I'm sure we can change it back.

My question: This is a done deal, right? Discussed in Council and being implimented?

Cool. Fine by me.

just responding to the church convo - ive been to a fair number of churches in the southern U.S. and some of them are very strict about the criteria for influence that seamboat mentioned i.e.salvation baptism and membership

with the larger churches especially youll usually see a definite criteria which establishes who's who, so to speak

ive also been to churches that were pretty much run by a single pastor (and the pastors family usually)

in those cases the biggest criteria for membership and influence is often simple participation and commitment

being somewhat intelligent is a pretty big plus and obviously the pastor is not going to be too interested in your opinion if you invite him to join your "human sacrafice to ba'al" facebook group he will probably not be especially open to your suggestions about the direction the church should take as an entity

but the gist is that of you are there to help the church in its functions, and you really are serious about being an activeember, and you stick around and demonstrate long term reliability, you will be considered a part of the church family and even tbough the pastor will have ultimate say in final decisions, your input will be considered fairy

again, this is in the smaller churches, ive been a part of a few and ive always liked them

so called "mega churches"are different

but i admit that i would not set foot in one unless the Force itself directly lead me there, as i feel the level of anonymity, the well estabkished heirarchy, the sprt of "entertainment factor" of performance style sermons, and the large amounts of money involved are, cumulatively, overwhelmingly corruptive influences on spirituality

because of this view,my personal experience with them is pretty low, my understanding of how they work has come more from talking to others and from social media

Jestor wrote:

I think it's a cultural difference.. I went to a few churches as a kid/teenager (one baptist, three Church of England), and there was never any restriction on those who weren't 'members'.

Can I ask you to what you mean then?

YOu cannot celebrate the Eucharist, nor be confirmed/baptized...

Other than a ceremony, where a non-,member would of course be welcome as a guest, or a feast, where a non-member might be invited by someone, seldom do non-members attend any of the ceremonies, unless it concerns family...

I am seriously trying to come up with something...

I'm thinking churches work differently over here...

I was christened at a church I think my parents went to maybe twice...

The two churches that I went to predominantly as a teenager (both Church of England), everyone (excluding little kids who would go for their own 'meeting') participated in communion.. The only difference between those who were confirmed and those who weren't was that those who were confirmed (who were about 6 in number in a congregation of 50 or more) drank from a goblet, everyone else had these weird little glasses, but everyone had the same wine. I've been to a few churches for other occasions where all people there were invited to participate in communion.

I never got confirmed myself because I became a Satanist before the time I would probably have considered confirmation.

I accompanied someone recently to church (a church they had never been to before) about being christened, having never been so and wanting to change that. The reverend told them that the only precondition was a meeting with them, and a sincere faith in God. No 'membership' or continuous participation in church required.

Jestor wrote:

Aqua wrote: How can it change again, if it is the application is an ever changing document

Because 'permeance' is a matter of perspective...

You have never seen it change, therefore a change to you is something out of the norm... For me, I have changed it 3-4 times...

I change my socks every day, becasue they become wore out... I change my vehicles evry 10-15 years, becasue they get wore out...

'Nothing is permanent except change"..

so many ways to read your posts

So many ways to read everything.... :lol:...

How do I say.. it should be out of the norm for me. To say that this is new for me is well said indeed. I find it interesting, I do not see the big picture because I am quite new to the temple, you do have seen, you know what it is different, master Jestor,

The only difference between me and you at this specific subject is that I am not affected by the past. Gives me an small edge to see maybe different things more fresh than you do, It gives me also a inscrutable problems to form a well thought opinion on this and even unawareness about the full effects of this change. Gives you a edge.
I like to talk about those kinds of things, because of the complete different opinions.

,,Nothing is permanent, except change'' - - > So according to it, change is permanent?
So according to it, change is permanent? - - > ,,Permanent change will not change.''
,,Permanent change will not change.'' - - > So the change itself will be the same?
I wonder.. if the concept of change, does not change..
Then it would it mean that change has a limitation? Why not beside it own concept?

Cabur Senaar wrote: My question: This is a done deal, right? Discussed in Council and being implimented?

Yes...

This is just talking about it, so that others are aware, and able to answer questions, instead of "ask Jestor", more folks know the 'whys' or 'why nots' and such...

If the thread slows by the months end, I will revive it again, as I shut off applications for a few days to make changes...

Aqua wrote: ,,Nothing is permanent, except change'' - - > So according to it, change is permanent?
So according to it, change is permanent? - - > ,,Permanent change will not change.''
,,Permanent change will not change.'' - - > So the change itself will be the same?
I wonder.. if the concept of change, does not change..
Then it would it mean that change has a limitation? Why not beside it own concept?

Are you unfamiliar with that expression?

Everything changes, evloves, more on, forward... Everything (that I can come up with... But, I would welcome a challenge to it, lol)... It is a matter of standing back far enough to see it...

"Change" changes too... Slower, faster, not too much, big leaps...

But, it constantly moves...

And constantly...

The only difference between me and you at this specific subject is that I am not affected by the past. Gives me an small edge to see maybe different things more fresh than you do, It gives me also a inscrutable problems to form a well thought opinion on this and even unawareness about the full effects of this change. Gives you a edge.
I like to talk about those kinds of things, because of the complete different opinions.

You are really not affected by the future in this either, lol...

Only those who fill out an application, and those who process it will be...

~

There clearly is a massive cultural difference. In the UK, even though schools try fairly hard to indoctrinate children into their religion of choice, people simply aren't religious, and don't know where the church building is or whether it is still being used for religious purposes or not. I could deny god's existence at the entrance and still be welcomed inside.

ren wrote: I could deny god's existence at the entrance and still be welcomed inside.

This is probably a discussion for another place, but perhaps churches accepting everyone (even those that don't believe), is better than shutting them out.

Edan wrote: This is probably a discussion for another place, but perhaps churches accepting everyone (even those that don't believe), is better than shutting them out.

None of the churches here "shut people out." Everyone's welcome to the help they need. But membership is different, and must be applied for carefully.

The thing about membership in a church (especially in the US) is that it basically makes you a shareholder in a non-profit.

My apologies, there probably were better words than 'shutting them out'... that wasn't quite what I meant.