because it was necessary to the college’s mission and served as the mandatory home of the college’s president, as well as housing for college guests and the location for numerous college-related gatherings. In Roman Catholic Archdiocese v. Dept. of Rev., 13 OTR 211, 213 (1995), this court held a rectory exempt under ORS 307.140 because the rectory was t Christ. Church test, that a religious use of property be “reasonably necessary for the furthering of the religious aims of the church,” it can be said that the cases fall into two categories: those cases involving residences and those not involving residences. As to the latter cases, so long as the use of the property related primarily to church business, the property was held exempt. See Found, of Human Understanding, 301 Or at 266 (<HOLDING>). As to the former cases, it can be said that
holding that imposition of government fees did not violate exempt status of religious organization holding that religious exercise is any exercise of religion whether or not compelled by or central to a system of religious belief and that the use building or conversion of real property for the purpose of religious exercise shall be considered  religious exercise holding exempt under ors 307130 which relates to other charitable institutions a building that was used as an office for a religious official and religious court and a printing press for a religious publication holding that lcras property devoted exclusively to public use is exempt from taxation under article xi section 9 holding exempt portions of a ranch devoted to and actually used for religious purposes