no way - the Catholic Church has been around for over 2,000 years.
What differentiate a profitable church from a company, other than a different legal structure?
Rupert Murdoch currently only ticks one, maybe two of those boxes.
They've executed (lots of) people with their power via sovereignty.
If you mean the church on the corner, well there is no difference, they are simply a profitable business that pays no taxes (the clergy are often owning nicer homes and driving nicer cars than their patrons).
I expect this is common in US megachurches. It certainly isn't the case everywhere. For instance, in the Church of England here in the UK the person who runs the church on the corner is probably poorer than most of the congregation. (Their salaries are very, very low. There's one big thing that makes up for that, which is that the church provides them with a house, usually quite a nice one.)
(Note: I am not any sort of apologist for the clergy; I am an outspoken atheist. But I have friends and family who work for churches, and I have a decent idea of how little they are paid.)
If you're talking about the Inquisition, then the church did not have sovereignty.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Fruit_Company
The company responsible for much of the misery throughout Americas.
Today they go by as Chiquita.