Hmm. This article has problems. Let's look at this, section by section:
The lede: 0. The lede is "2+2=4." This sort of sets the tone for the article: random things will appear on the page, and we are expected to laugh at them by virtue of the fact that we didn't expect to see them. Sadly, this is not a very effective technique. It's hard to laugh at a first-grade addition problem.
Definition: 1. Ouch. So, apparently, this article is going to be about the Flying Spaghetti Monster, a premise cooked up (no pun intended) by atheists in order to demonstrate the absurdity of the concept of God. So, okay, we have room to satirize atheism, or monotheism, or interpreting reality using abstract mind games. But what do we get instead? Jews who overpay hookers, cats with guns, and people pooping bullets. So, apparently, this article isn't going to be a satire of the FSM at all; it just treats the FSM as something so random that it must be funny (whoa! spaghetti with wings!) and then tries to match it with equal doses of randomness. Sorry to say: that's not going to work. Uncyclopedia is chock-full of articles overloaded with randomness. We delete a dozen of them every day.
History: 1. It's a very, very bad sign when video game characters start appearing in an article. What this article sort of set itself up as is an article that exists in a universe where people actually literally worship the FSM, but is otherwise our universe. Now it's suggesting that the article takes place in a universe where people worship the FSM and video game characters are real and there are probably absolutely no rules of logic or physics. And it's just impossible to write clever satire in a universe with no rules. You can even ruin satire by taking an article out of universe: while "Democrats are people who think the government is everyone's mother" might be a little amusing, "Democrats are flying monkeys who wield poop guns and think the government is everyone's mother" is no longer even the tiniest bit funny. Also, name-dropping pop-culture references is just a bad idea. There's just no reason for Brian Griffin or Cookie Monster to be in this article. None at all.
How to enter in the Church: 1. Fart, poop, toilet licking, poopy bowls. Did you laugh just now when you read that? I didn't.
People who attended at Orthodox Monsterist Church: -1. This is the worst kind of listcruft - just a list of things we're all familiar with that have nothing to do with the article. Here's another list of things that have nothing to do with the article: bread, Aspirin, racquetball, turtles. Did that make you laugh? See the problem?
(???): 0. There's no reason for this. These kinds of sections kind of say "Hey, look at me, I'm experimenting with a wiki!" - they don't add anything to the article except the sense that it was written by someone who wasn't trying very hard.
I'm going to stop the breakdown here. The rest is the same.
This is ultimately the article's failing: it has no concept. At least, no concept beyond "'Flying Spaghetti Monster' is a funny-sounding phrase; let's mention it and then mention a lot of other things that exist."
Prose and formatting:
The prose isn't the worst I've read, but there are still mistakes everywhere. "Asain Chicks." "The Chruch." "the toliet." "He ask Mario if he can has pasta." Consider editing using Firefox, which has a built-in spell checker. Also, the folks at Uncyclopedia:Proofreading Service would be happy to look over an article. But I wouldn't submit this one to them, really - fixing the grammar in this article would be a waste of time. It's just a little advice for your next one.
There are times when crappy MS-Paint pictures are hilarious. This is not one of them. Really, though, this article runs into the same problem as a lot of random articles: it's impossible to illustrate randomness. Most people just stick in the animated gif of the guy's head "asploding." Please don't do that.
I'm sorry if this review is harsh - and I know it is. Don't be disheartened. Read UN:HTBFANJS - it'll give you some tips for turning random nonsense into clever satire. Look over Uncyclopedia:Best of, and see the kinds of articles people around here really appreciate. Consider this one a learning experience. Good luck.