Look at it another way.....if your religion has so little faith and so few practitioners willing to sacrifice their own contribution that it can't survive without taking in profit, what does that say about it? Lots of secular non-profit orgs need to do that, but they are not burdened with the mission of spreading the Good News (Gospel is such a misunderstood word) - so their only standard is to meet legal requirements. The Church....God's Church....should have higher standards.
The Church is not "taking in profit" when they ask someone to pay the COSTS of a wedding in their building. Your above description clearly shows that you want the religious adherents to make their own contributions in order to cover the COSTS of someone else's wedding ceremony. That's the definition of being a freeloader.
You're holding to a double-standard for religious non-profits due to your misunderstanding of the legal definition. And yes, in this discussion, the legal definition is what counts, since if the laws/courts were not involved, this wouldn't be any kind of problem at all in the first place.
