Django templates make sense in that context, but Jinja2 templates are 90% the same. You need to know one or two more rules about () and other metacharacters, but there isn't much cognitive dissonance in a switch-over. It is easier to call arbitrary code from Jinja2, which simplifies the life of programmers even when having to work with laymen editors.
Django is no longer a newspaper-centric framework. Far more users of Django want a hacker-centric template language. Markdown and other markup languages are far closer to the needs that the Django template language once filled.
I do prefer Jinja templates, and I plan to convert the Django-templated projects I have to them the next time I hack on them. I hate the parenthisis-avoiding dispatch mechanism that does a bunch of wasteful dynamic type-checks, all to make the syntax more obnoxiously clever. I hate the fact that it implements it's own shitty interpreter. It feels Ruby-ish in the most pejorative way.
But Markdown doesn't fit the 'newspaper' usage model in anywhere near the same way -- Django templates let the writer do all kinds of layout fuckery in an idiot-proof, dev-supported, maintainable, extensible, {%benificent_adjective%} way.
But they aren't idiot proof. That's exactly the problem. If you can't trust the template writer to understand {{ foo.bar }} vs {{ foo.bar() }} how could you trust them to not do something with HTML, CSS, JS, or Django-templates which breaks the page? Either you trust your designers because you hire smart, multi-talented people. Or you want something simple, predictable, and completely impotent... you know... like a rich text editor...
Django is no longer a newspaper-centric framework. Far more users of Django want a hacker-centric template language. Markdown and other markup languages are far closer to the needs that the Django template language once filled.