ATTN: COUNCIL; Updated Doctrine Proposal

4 years 1 month ago - 4 years 1 month ago #344241 by Alethea Thompson
Good Timezone! :D (not morning everywhere! XD)

So with the help of Church Members that wanted to weigh in on the editing process, we have a new proposal for the Doctrine. In case you missed the reasoning behind this project in the other thread:

ToTJO's doctrine takes two documents written by different people in the overall community and has them just kind of inserted into what we believe. Despite the fact that these two documents have been edited over time by members of ToTJO, they still remain two separate documents with a lot of material for people to get through. They have a lot of the same information, but when you look at it as two looks like a lot more than what it really is.

Although much of the membership has left ToTJO over the years, it's still an old enough order that it owes itself the respect to choose one document and to stick with it: Be it the 21 Maxims, the 16 Teachings, or the document enclosed that is tentatively named "The Principles of Jediism" (no marriage to the name! just the only thing I could come up with last minute XD).

I, personally, am in favor of the document "The Principles of Jediism", because it takes both of the documents we have been using to raise up Jedi and melds them together.

The document below also includes the rest of the Doctrine we use. There were a couple of edits (the definition of Jediism, a new name for The Creed [based on a discussion with Br. John], and a short introduction of the Jedi Code), but it is largely the same thing. By looking at what the new complete doctrine would look like, it is my hope that you will see just how much less intimidating it would be for people coming onto the path to have one document vs. 2.

Thank you for your time, I truly hope that you will take the time to consider what has been said. *bows*

P.S. I don't know what's up with the other attached things. Ignore them :/. The only one that is important is the one displayed below.

Attachment ToTJOProjectDoctrine_2019-10-10.pdf not found

This message has attachments files.
Please log in or register to see it.

Last edit: 4 years 1 month ago by Alethea Thompson.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Neaj Pa Bol, Br. John, Eleven, Locksley, Carlos.Martinez3, Kobos, Brick, jpadkins

Please Log in to join the conversation.

4 years 1 month ago #344298 by Carlos.Martinez3
Can you explain a bit further the need for this new update?
The following user(s) said Thank You: Kobos

Please Log in to join the conversation.

4 years 1 month ago #344301 by Alethea Thompson
The answer is simple: Two documents is too much.

As the future structure of our organization is in a possible transition (I'm aware nothing has been set in stone, but there is strong talk of this) the one thing that isn't being talked about is how to refocus our membership on what it means to be a Jedi. As it stands, the Doctrine is a part of that problem. For more than a decade, there have been maybe 5 people that ever use the Doctrine as the basis of their arguments- and that is something we need to fix.

In part, I'm willing to bet that some of those problems stem from the fact that we don't have an IP built around the Doctrine. Which has been something I've said for years (more vocal at the beginning of this last decade, and more silent as it progressed). But another reason is that we have way too much in our doctrine TO build an IP which focuses upon it.

You can say that the IP does, because we have it as an assignment. But by and large the IP was never designed to focus people on what the Jedi Path was, but rather for knights and masters to get to know who their potential students are, to weed out those that don't want to put in any work (and I'm not saying that as an observation, that's literally the answer I've received from council members that were present earlier this decade).

But even if we wanted to build a new IP having 2 documents would make that process far more daunting. It's my belief that we need to settle on ONE document. There are now three to choose from.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Eleven, Skryym, Kobos

Please Log in to join the conversation.

4 years 1 month ago #344303 by TheDude
I agree that a single centralized document is best for the temple. With that being said, when it comes to Jedi doctrine, well, there isn't much of it. It isn't as extensive as the laws of Moses. A person may understand and agree with our doctrine with a single reading in under 15 minutes. The IP contains a wider knowledge-base than the doctrine does, and while I'm all for improving it I think that focusing too intently on the doctrine in the IP would be detrimental. As it stands, the doctrine is only one of many lessons in the IP. We could take the wider concepts and apply a Jedi context, though, such as replacing the Krishnamurti and Watts meditation lesson with a variety of meditation techniques posted by TOTJO members. tzb has a good Jedi Code guided meditation, for example, and while I'm not saying to use that one specifically something like it would be more fitting in my opinion.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Kobos, For-Emris

Please Log in to join the conversation.

4 years 1 month ago #344306 by Alethea Thompson
There is a good amount of information in the Liturgical book that could be useful for our IP. :). We have a lot of sermons around here too. But even those are written based on what has been taught here.

I think your comment "when it comes to Jedi doctrine, well, there isn't much of it" is telling of how much the order has failed to make our doctrine a central figure of what we believe. The Jedi Path isn't confined to ToTJO, we all know there are other orders out there that exist. But what is there and what is here do not have to match.

I think it's helpful to have different groups. Like "Denominations" or "Sects", where ToTJO represents one of those. There's also a lot of opportunity in this order to bring about discussions of how different tenets in our doctrine (whatever we choose) is echoed in another culture (calling back to our roots in Joseph Campbell's work).
The following user(s) said Thank You: TheDude, Kobos, Brick, For-Emris

Please Log in to join the conversation.

4 years 1 month ago #344319 by ren
I have never thought of our doctrine as 'too much'. The purpose of the doctrine is not to provide dumbed down answers, it is to create more questions, with the search for them being 'the journey' many here talk about. If anything, doctrinal changes should make the journey greater, not duller.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Carlos.Martinez3, Kobos, Brick

Please Log in to join the conversation.