...Maybe your objection is more centered on the church rather than non-profits in general...
That's a fair assumption. And I don't claim innocence in this. I have only come to the place where I see the problem recently.
For a Christian church to say they are "non-profit" while requiring "donations" for goods or services, seems to me, there is a problem reconciling that with faith and honesty. I know that for most religious groups, my thoughts on this would be challenging to the point of being offensive. I'm okay with that.
I think you can reconcile your thoughts in terms of "not-for-profit."
Any non-profit, religious or non religious, must cover its cost of providing services.
"Thou shalt not muzzel the ox that treads the corn." Paul uses that verse to explain that he saw no contradition in receiving material support for Spiritual ministry.
You think Paul was writing about The Church charging for services? The way it reads to me is that he was talking about The Church supporting it's own ministers (Paul and Barnabas) in their missionary work and travel. Or at least the idea that he should be able to expect that.
(From 1 Corinthians 9)
7 Who serves as a soldier at his own expense? Who plants a vineyard and does not eat its grapes? Who tends a flock and does not drink the milk? 8 Do I say this merely on human authority? Doesn�t the Law say the same thing? 9 For it is written in the Law of Moses: �Do not muzzle an ox while it is treading out the grain.�[b] Is it about oxen that God is concerned? 10 Surely he says this for us, doesn�t he? Yes, this was written for us, because whoever plows and threshes should be able to do so in the hope of sharing in the harvest. 11 If we have sown spiritual seed among you, is it too much if we reap a material harvest from you? 12 If others have this right of support from you, shouldn�t we have it all the more?
But we did not use this right. On the contrary, we put up with anything rather than hinder the gospel of Christ.
13 Don�t you know that those who serve in the temple get their food from the temple, and that those who serve at the altar share in what is offered on the altar? 14 In the same way, the Lord has commanded that those who preach the gospel should receive their living from the gospel.
Here, he is not talking about The Church being paid for a service - quite the opposite. The focus of the passage is on The Church providing for those who are serving. Then he goes on to write...
15 But I have not used any of these rights. And I am not writing this in the hope that you will do such things for me, for I would rather die than allow anyone to deprive me of this boast. 16 For when I preach the gospel, I cannot boast, since I am compelled to preach. Woe to me if I do not preach the gospel! 17 If I preach voluntarily, I have a reward; if not voluntarily, I am simply discharging the trust committed to me. 18 What then is my reward? Just this: that in preaching the gospel I may offer it free of charge, and so not make full use of my rights as a preacher of the gospel.
Paul doesn't condemn the preacher who accepts support from The Church - but he doesn't demand it for himself.
I don't think that helps me agree with Christian Churches charging members or non-members for services or goods for profit. And I definitely don't think this excuses charging arbitrary fees for a wedding. But neither, in my mind, have anything to do with expecting expenses (like clean-up) to be covered by the user.
