RANKING: Jedi Vs. Clergy

Rev. Justice wrote:

I believe the title of the post, \"Jedi Vs. Clergy\", is misleading. Jedi and Clergy would be better suited. I agree with Dhagon, the titles given tend to give off a \"Catholic\" feel to them. The definitions of our ranks first posted for us were as follows (taken directly from one of Bishop Whiteman's post);

Master- This rank is achieved when a Sr. Knight completes the training of his apprentice who then becomes a full knight and takes an apprentice of their own. (this rank may be awarded based on previous experience.)

Sr. Knight- This rank is bestowed upon those knights who take an apprentice. The taking of an apprentice is an added responsibility far beyond those of a regular Jedi knight and as such this rank carries the same Autonomy as a Master. This rank holds even after the Sr. Knights first apprentice graduates. (this rank may be awarded based on previous experience)

Jedi Knight - This Rank is bestowed upon those who have completed the training of a Master or Sr. Knight in full. (this rank may be awarded based on previous experience)

Knight apprentice- This rank is bestowed upon those who are currently in training under a Master or Sr. Knight

Knight Initiate - This rank is bestowed upon those who become members of this church by filling out the registration form and taking the oath.

Using these definitions is what caused me to lable myself as a Sr. Knight by mistake because my clergy certificate states I am a \"Knight of Jediism\" and I now have an apprentice. By the definionof a Sr. Knight, it fits. Now, that being said, why aren't we using these as our titles by themselves? They are generic to Jediism. Could not Masters that are clergy still be called Master instead of Bishop? All ordained clegy persons could be called Rev. Just as apprentices call the Master, Sr. Knight, or Knight that trains them \"Master\" as a sign of respect, is being an ordained clergy person and being referred to as just Rev. any less respectful while performing the task and duties assigned to clergy? I understand Br John is the Sr. Pastor of our temple, so what is wrong with addressing him as Rev. John Phelan or addressing Bishop Whiteman as Rev. Whiteman as in the past? Could we not add a page to the Main Menu that lists the official position within the Order that those individuals hold as far a church function goes, i.e. Rev. Tom Whiteman, Bishop and so on? I understand the need for rank structure all too well given my military background, but after much thought and Dhagon expressing his concern, I ask why did we choose to use the terms we did for the clergy over a Jedi specific title?
Also, our use of \"screen names\" is a problem in and of it's self, so to speak. If you are a member of the clergy, why not use the screen name Rev. So-and-so as a way to identify ourselves as clergy instead of (only using these as examples) Twsoundsoff or Dan? I know we identify who we are in our signiture blocks, but why not just make it easier for the users by adapting our screen names and listing our ranks in the signature block? Someone looking through the member list for the first time has no idea who the members of the clergy are. We as clergy are here for the members of the Order, so why not make it easier for the members to identify us as they need to.
None of this was said to offend anyone. Just thoughts and questions that were running through one person's mind.

That will actually be addressed when we get the full list up and running. It will show who is what, etc... and will be fully browseable.

In so far as the title's themselves go i will say again, Not all Jedi are Clergy. no they must be disticintive from one another. and also, the ranking committee was not concerned with clergy ranking but with jedi Ranking, that is why they were never discussed. The ranking committee does not have any power with regard to clergy ranking and so forth. It is merely to handle the workings of Jedi ranking alone. and as they must be seperate due to the fact that all Jedi are not clergy, so is the ranking committee in discernment with regard to clergy rank.

Folks, if you see a problem or take issue with something, please don't merely express that concern, please offer solutions as well. In this matter, it is simply a fact that we must accept that Jedi and Clergy are not the same. Some are one, some are Both, and because of that they must be held in seperate distinctions. but please offer what you would consider as Jedi Clergy titles.

I was asked earlier what I thought about this topic and after reading the thread I believe that the currently system can be used to identify clergy as well. Clergy in other religions are the teachers, pasters, and guids of their religion. It would seem that the Mater and Sr. knight are those positions. They are the ones that take on apprentices and guid the flock. A inititiate, and apprentice are the learners. They are new to the order and do not yet know all that is happening. A Jedi Knight is simply someone who has completed their personal training. If they do not what to be clergy and take on apprentices then thats as high as one needs to go. Even in the star wars fiction only a very few Jedi where Masters, and not every Jedi has an apprentice all the time. My suggestion is simply to make the last two ranks, Sr. knight and Master the ranks of the clergy.

aximili007 wrote:

I was asked earlier what I thought about this topic and after reading the thread I believe that the currently system can be used to identify clergy as well. Clergy in other religions are the teachers, pasters, and guids of their religion. It would seem that the Mater and Sr. knight are those positions. They are the ones that take on apprentices and guid the flock. A inititiate, and apprentice are the learners. They are new to the order and do not yet know all that is happening. A Jedi Knight is simply someone who has completed their personal training. If they do not what to be clergy and take on apprentices then thats as high as one needs to go. Even in the star wars fiction only a very few Jedi where Masters, and not every Jedi has an apprentice all the time. My suggestion is simply to make the last two ranks, Sr. knight and Master the ranks of the clergy.

My apologies, but that would be inappropriate as not all Jedi are Clergy and not all Jedi want to be.

I don't believe there needs to be a separate rank to go with being a clergy person. Members of the Clergy are merely offering themselves to serve the role of religious leader of ceremonies and such, which is simply an added role to the one already assumed by the title they have.The simple O.C.P. at the end of someones signature or what not fills that void fine. Or even Rev. as has been used here for a while is widely used among religions, which is also fine to point out the fact that someone is of the clergy. On the other hand by basing what clergy rank you are with what Jedi rank you are, is intertwining them as well. I do ask, why do those who choose to serve in a Clergy capacity deserve more respect than those who do not? They are Jedi just the same, they just choose to offer more of their time and effort, which is admirable yes, but not necessarily deserving of more respect than any other Jedi. Do I have other names that could be used, no, simply because I don't believe it is necesary. Do note Br. Tom, I mean no offense by any of this discussion, so I hope you are not taking it that way, I'm just expressing my views and beliefs.

DK

I do not take offense, or I would have made that known. However, I also believe that any member of the Clergy are due respect to them in that distinction as well as whatever distinction they are as a Jedi. It is not a \"better\" thing but as you said a \"more\" thing. No one is any better than anyone else, but i do believe that those who offer more of thier time and talents deserve to be recognized for it, as is in the military (of which you are a part, yes?)

Now, with regard to how they are known, the varying ranks of Clergy all come with thier own distinct responsibilites. Yes they are religious leaders and counselors, but each level (as in the military) as its own unique responsibilities.

Regarding basing rank on Jedi Level, they are not one in the same. However, Do you not agree that a person who is clergy and can ordain new clergy (A bishop) should have an advanced knowledge of Jediism and how it relates to other religions and have shown themselves of the ability to make these discernments soundly? Like wise, do you not agree that anyone should be able to be a minister?

Now, my personal thoughts have not truly been expressed here.
\"If it isn't broke, don't fix it.\"
How is this broken?

Also, if the issue is that it was borrowed from other religions then i would ask, what about our doctrine itself. all of our teachings and values are a modern organization of very ancient ideals, Borrowed from many ancient religions. Why would this be any different?

It's not so much broken, as just being questioned is all. You did point out a very important and generally unknown fact, the ranking commitee only handled the Jedi rankings, not the clergy.
I used the example of Catholics because it is the most commonly known to use such titles and most widely seen by people on TV, movies, and whatnot.
I pointed this out in my prior post that could serve to help identify our clergy members;
\"...if you are a member of the clergy, why not use the screen name Rev. So-and-so as a way to identify ourselves as clergy instead of (only using these as examples) Twsoundsoff or Dan? I know we identify who we are in our signiture blocks, but why not just make it easier for the users by adapting our screen names and listing our ranks in the signature block? Someone looking through the member list for the first time has no idea who the members of the clergy are. We as clergy are here for the members of the Order, so why not make it easier for the members to identify us as they need to.\"

I see nothing wrong with the names of the ranks. It makes it feel more like the church that we are instead of just an organization.

Rev. Justice wrote:

It's not so much broken, as just being questioned is all. You did point out a very important and generally unknown fact, the ranking commitee only handled the Jedi rankings, not the clergy.
I used the example of Catholics because it is the most commonly known to use such titles and most widely seen by people on TV, movies, and whatnot.
I pointed this out in my prior post that could serve to help identify our clergy members;
\"...if you are a member of the clergy, why not use the screen name Rev. So-and-so as a way to identify ourselves as clergy instead of (only using these as examples) Twsoundsoff or Dan? I know we identify who we are in our signiture blocks, but why not just make it easier for the users by adapting our screen names and listing our ranks in the signature block? Someone looking through the member list for the first time has no idea who the members of the clergy are. We as clergy are here for the members of the Order, so why not make it easier for the members to identify us as they need to.\"

I understand this, and it is up to each member what thier screenname is. I leave mine as is for familiarity and also when you change it you lose all of your saved PM's and I want to keep them all. I do not think it would be prudent to force anyone to change thier screen name. Also, as i mentions before, this would be addressed by the completed and full member database. All members will (once it is up) be able to search the list and see who is what and so forth. so this will then be Moot.