Talk:Process Church of the Final Judgment

message: I am a member of The Process Church of The Final Judgement and would like to correct you on the fact that you say Robert was taking the Church on a more Satanic Leaning, This is far from correct, the truth of the matter is that a divorce occurred between Robert and Mary Anne and put excessive strain on the Group as Mary Anne tried to exert Control and turn it into a Jehovian Cult, The Foundation finally splintered also and the result was a Group called Best Friends In Utah.  — Preceding undated comment added 03:33, 30 November 2002
----
I too am a member of The Process Church of the Final Judgement - and what people don't get is that the leadership of The Process - prior to the skizm - ceased to be Processeans - they acknowledged their leaving, and the people that stayed on also acknowledged their collective departure.  So what became of this person and that person is irrelevant.  If you want to focus on what we are doing NOW - TODAY - then post some questions.
All of this unfounded jabber does nothing except continue these 'urban legends' that have spawned from the continued discussions that are really warped.
And all of these so-called references to Scientology - the elements that may have existed were removed way back in the early 70's.  What's left is purely Processean.  We're authentic in what we do, and there was a very strong effort to make sure we were not stealing anything from anyone or any other group.
And some of you wonder why we keep to ourselves?  What would you think if you're Church was accused of all of this evil?  We have families and lives - please - be polite - and keep your speculation to yourselves.
But of course people are not interested in the truth, just something good to read...  Something to boast about...
Thanks to those who try to keep the truth up-front and present.
As it is, so be it.
--Harmanus 20:49, 7 March 2007 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.40.41.250 (talk) 20:49, 7 March 2007‎ 
As it is
I am engaged in what I hope to be a fruitful study of The Church yet all I have to rely upon to date are the texts, music and videos available in public forum. Does anyone with authenticity care to engage me in a dialog toward a beneficial understanding, please? 4markviaanger (talk) 22:34, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Well I have been a part of organized religion since I was a child and I can say it has left me quite disillusioned. I also am curious on knowing what the process was truly about Cleveland333 (talk) 09:07, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Initial Comments

message: How does The Holy Terror Church of Final Judgement relate to The Process Church of The Final Judgement?  From an outsider's standpoint, it seems that they use the same symbolism, and some of the beliefs seem to of both churches seem similar.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.220.87.25 (talk) 07:43, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Holy Terror Church of Final Judgement

message: Adding something as to the current status (active or defunct) of the group might be beneficial.  I know next to nothing about them, so can't update the article myself. Surv1v4l1st (Talk|Contribs) 00:43, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Current status? 

message: The article states that "[f]ollowing DeGrimston's removal, the group underwent a significant change in orientation and renamed itself the Foundation – Church of the Millennium. Many of the same believers left to follow Gilles Deleuze's Anti-Oedipal movement." The citation for this is broken, and I can't find any other corroboration. This statement seems suspect given that there was never really a Deleuzian mass movement and Anti-Oedipus didn't appear in English until 1977. I would not be surprised if this turned out to be vandalism. Jordansc (talk)   — Preceding undated comment added 04:15, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Deleuze?

message: The article's lead states that, "Many of the same believers left to follow Gilles Deleuze's Anti-Oedipal movement" - with "anti-Oedipal" linked to Anti-Oedipus. That claim seems strange, to say the least. Is it properly cited? FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 23:15, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deleuze 

message: The logo spells judgement with two E's in it, but the article title has only one E in judgment.  Should we be making this consistent?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.1.95.159 (talk) 08:12, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Judgment or Judgement? 

message: There is no verifiable or reliable source linking the two together. The reference should be removed. Clintoncimring (talk) 02:34, 6 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Here is a piece in the words of founders of Best Friends Animal Society about their involvement in the Process Church. This is published on the organization's site. -AuthorAuthor (talk) 04:47, 6 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:Best Friends Animal Society]] 

message: This is a religious group, so they surely must posses some beliefs?  The article doesn't state.  They believe in a singular god.  That's a good start, but it doesn't help the reader understand this groups beliefs.  Christianity, Islam and Judaism also believe in a singular god.  Is this a Christian group?  Is it a Muslim group?  I don't think so.  What is it, exactly?  21:34, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I want to add, I think their "symbol" is *extremely* menacing.  To me, it evokes something like a Nazi Swastika.  139.138.6.121 (talk) 21:57, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: There's a bit about beliefs in the "Teaching and Activities" section. Apparently they had four gods -- Jehovah, Lucifer, Satan, and Christ. Because Satan (and Lucifer) was in their pantheon, they were Satanists to a degree I suppose. Herostratus (talk) 02:54, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: See the newly split Beliefs section. Editor2020 (talk) 03:11, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  What do they *believe* in? 

message: Do they have a web presence that can be linked to in the article?  Valgrus Thunderaxe (talk) 07:41, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: See External links section. Editor2020 (talk) 21:45, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Any web presence? 

message: I am always interested in endings - they are never as well documented as beginnings.
'Fortean Times' No 134 May 2000 had a very good article on the Process, which described very evocatively the last time DeGrimston was seen - I don't think "although abandoned the project in 1979, when he moved professionally into business" quite covers the pathos of it.
"The final end came in 1975. Crossing Boston Common with a few dedicated believers and his current paramour DeGrimston suddenly stopped and told his loyal few "We're just going to leave you now, OK?", and walked with his partner across the Common, into the land of Grey. Last reports were that he found work in an American Telephone Company".
I propose to add this to the article if no one objects.
Wolstan Dixie (talk) 19:56, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  The End 

message: The History section introduces a Robert Moore without any indication that he is also previously mentioned as Robert de Grimston. I see the Wikipedia page on Robert de Grimston specifically refers to his alternative name as Robert Moor - without an "e".  Sohpix (talk) 13:43, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Poor cogency in article