I like Kaimi’s qua distinction, but I think he takes it too far. In my relations with the church in any capacity, I would be reluctant to treat the church as mere employer or mere tenant, etc. Instead, I would think that one should first try to solve it as a family matter. Only when other members have made it clear by refusing to compromise that they see the relationship as landlord-tenant or employer-employee would I feel comfortable treating it that way myself, and even then if I couldn’t afford the loss.
Some of my friends talk about the Church and the Members, as if they were two separate groups. Most of the time, that’s just not true. We run the church, we our the church, and that kind of lay leadership and operation means that things will often be done slipshod and ramshackle. I for one prefer to endure a few bumps and blows for the sake of keeping the church like a self-run family. We’ve already gone too corporative for comfort, and lawsuits only encourage that trend.