You are wrong. It is one thing to prevent a church from being built because of the perceived "nuisance" of having the church in a neighborhood (BTW, the church is nearly empty 90% of the time so you traffic and noise problems are strawman arguments). But it is completely different to try to seize the lands that the church wants to build on for a hotel and shopping space and arena for a private hockey team. It IS happening.
http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/news/local/states/new_jersey/11880284.htm
http://www.masslive.com/hampfrank/republican/index.ssf?/base/news-0/1117179959213180.xml&coll=1
The second one seems to be irrelevant to the church insofar as you have TWO groups trying to take the land, and, as I read it, one of those groups wants to put up an apartment complex that the other group doesn't want there. Where does the church fit in? It owns the land, but it's not clear from the article why it isn't involved in this. We need more info on this.