Title: Hume Lake Christian Camps, Inc. v. Planning Bd. of Monterey

State: massachusetts

Issuer: Massachusetts Supreme Court

Document:

NOTICE:  All slip opinions and orders are subject to formal 
revision and are superseded by the advance sheets and bound 
volumes of the Official Reports.  If you find a typographical 
error or other formal error, please notify the Reporter of 
Decisions, Supreme Judicial Court, John Adams Courthouse, 1 
Pemberton Square, Suite 2500, Boston, MA, 02108-1750; (617) 557-
1030; SJCReporter@sjc.state.ma.us 
 
SJC-13365 
 
HUME LAKE CHRISTIAN CAMPS, INC.  vs.  PLANNING BOARD OF 
MONTEREY. 
 
 
 
Suffolk.     February 6, 2023. - June 7, 2023. 
 
Present:  Budd, C.J., Gaziano, Lowy, Cypher, Kafker, Wendlandt, 
& Georges, JJ. 
 
 
Zoning, Exemption, Religious use, By-law.  Religion. 
 
 
 
Civil action commenced in the Land Court Department on 
August 9, 2019. 
 
The case was heard by Diane R. Rubin, J. 
 
The Supreme Judicial Court on its own initiative 
transferred the case from the Appeals Court. 
 
 
Donna M. Brewer for the defendant. 
Alexandra H. Glover for the plaintiff. 
Kate Moran Carter, Ryan Douglas Grondahl, Kathleen M. 
Heyer, Nicholas P. Shapiro, & Taylor N. Lee, for Real Estate Bar 
Association for Massachusetts, Inc., & another, amici curiae, 
submitted a brief. 
 
 
 
GAZIANO, J.  In this case we must decide whether the 
plaintiff's proposal to build a recreational vehicle (RV) camp 
on its campground is an exempted use within the meaning of the 
2 
 
Dover Amendment, G. L. c. 40A, § 3.  The Dover Amendment limits 
the ability of municipalities to "regulate or restrict the use 
of land or structures for religious purposes . . . on land owned 
or leased by . . . a religious sect or denomination."  Id.  The 
plaintiff, Hume Lake Christian Camps, Inc. (Hume), is a 
nonprofit Christian organization that operates camps in service 
of its mission to "evangelize the world."  Hume operates a camp 
in Monterey and provides to camp attendees chapel sessions, 
religious instruction, and opportunities for spiritual 
reflection, as well as secular recreational activities.  Hume 
applied to the defendant planning board of Monterey (board) to 
build an RV camp on the grounds of its Monterey property.  The 
RV camp would be used to house families who attend camp 
sessions, as well as volunteers and seasonal staff who perform a 
variety of duties at the camp.  The board denied Hume's 
application, on the ground that the RV camp would not be an 
exempt religious use under the terms of the Dover Amendment. 
 
Hume appealed to the Land Court from the board's denial of 
its application.  Following a trial over three separate days 
(including a view), in April 2022 a Land Court judge decided 
that residences for family attendees at the RV camp would serve 
a predominantly religious purpose and therefore would be exempt 
under the Dover Amendment.  The judge also concluded that 
housing volunteers and seasonal staff at the RV camp would serve 
3 
 
a financial, rather than a religious, purpose and accordingly 
would not be exempt under the Dover Amendment.  The board 
appealed to the Appeals Court, and Hume filed a cross appeal.  
We then transferred the case to this court on our own motion.  
We conclude that, because Hume's proposal to build an RV park 
has as its primary or dominant purpose a religiously significant 
goal, the RV park would be an exempt religious use.1 
 
1.  Background.  We recite the facts based on the trial 
judge's findings and the parties' stipulation of facts, 
reserving some facts for later discussion. 
 
a.  Hume Lake Christian Camps.  Hume was founded in 1946 
and is based in California.  It describes itself as a 
nondenominational, conservative, evangelical Christian 
organization that unites different denominations that all share 
an evangelical Christian faith.  Hume's fundamental mission is 
to "evangelize the world."  Its mission statement provides: 
"We desire that each person coming into contact with this 
global ministry will accept Jesus Christ as their personal 
savior; grow in their faith and Christian character 
development; establish the priorities of prayer, Bible 
study, and Christian Fellowship while associating with the 
local church; devote their lives in service to our Lord 
Jesus at home and abroad.  We will continue to emphasize 
ministries to youth." 
 
Hume carries out this mission through its "camping ministry." 
 
1 We acknowledge the amicus brief submitted by the Real 
Estate Bar Association for Massachusetts, Inc., and the Abstract 
Club. 
4 
 
 
Hume runs camps at three permanent locations, two in 
California and the third in Massachusetts.  It operates its 
camps according to its interpretation of Christian scripture, 
which is set forth in its statement of beliefs.  Hume is 
governed by a board of directors of from twelve to fifteen 
members.  Under Hume's bylaws, board members must meet the 
requirements for elders as set forth in the Bible, in Peter 5:1-
4 and Timothy 3:1-7.  The Internal Revenue Service has 
recognized Hume as a religious charity under 26 U.S.C. 
§ 170(b)(1)(A)(i), and as a nonprofit organization under 
§ 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. 
 
The judge's findings in large part were based on the 
testimony of two individuals who were employed by Hume at the 
time of trial.  At that time, Lenny Harris was Hume's director 
for ministry expansion, and John Szablowski was the senior camp 
director at Hume's Monterey camp, otherwise known as Hume New 
England (Hume NE).  Harris and Szablowski each testified that 
Hume's mission is "to teach spiritual principles and to tell 
people the good news of the Bible in the setting of nature, in 
the setting of camping."  The judge credited both men as having 
sincerely held beliefs consistent with Hume's statement of 
5 
 
beliefs, and a commitment to sharing their beliefs with others 
through the work of Hume.2 
 
b.  Hume NE.  Hume first acquired the Hume NE campground in 
2012.  At the time of trial, Hume NE operated on more than 400 
acres of land.  Its property included a number of small 
buildings, as well as a dining hall, two newer and larger 
residential lodges with gathering spaces, and a small and a 
large chapel.  The smaller buildings served as housing, as well 
as spaces for activities, storage, and a snack shop. 
 
In order to ensure that its camp furthered Hume's religious 
mission, Hume NE required that all staff, including seasonal 
employees, agree to and sign Hume's statement of beliefs.  Job 
postings for counsellors and food service assistants stated that 
applicants had to agree "with the theological positions, 
philosophy, and policies of [Hume]."  Szablowski was responsible 
 
 
2 In his testimony, Harris summarized that statement of 
beliefs: 
 
"We believe that God is the creator.  We believe that he 
created man.  That man sinned, was separated from God.  We 
believe that God sent his son, Jesus Christ, as the final 
sacrifice for man's sin.  For those who believe in him in 
his name and accept him, they are, we refer to[,] as born 
again.  They become believers, Christians.  They are 
assured a place in heaven.  We believe that the Bible is 
inspired by God.  It's his inerrant word.  We believe that 
Jesus was killed, died, was buried, was resurrected, and 
ascended into heaven, is there preparing a place for us, 
who are believers.  And that one day, as believers, we will 
be in his presence." 
6 
 
for determining whether each job applicant sufficiently was 
committed to the statement of beliefs to work at the camp.  
Szablowski testified that, as part of this process, he asked 
each applicant whether he or she had been baptized as "public 
declaration of their faith." 
 
Hume NE, which earns income from camper fees, concession 
sales, and donations, does not generate enough revenue to cover 
its operating costs.  To compensate for an annual deficit of 
approximately one-third of its operating expenses, the camp has 
received a substantial amount of financial support from Hume, 
its parent organization.  Additionally, in order to save money, 
Hume NE relies on the services of volunteers.  Volunteers assist 
with operations, maintenance, and new projects.  Hume provides 
volunteers with housing and free meals in exchange for their 
labor.  Volunteers are not required to sign the statement of 
beliefs, nor must they agree with Hume's religious precepts. 
 
Hume NE does not host secular corporate retreats or private 
events on its property.  Rather, its campground and facilities 
are available for use only to campers who attend one of its two 
types of programs, "program camps" and "guest retreats."  As of 
the date of trial, over sixty-five different churches, serving 
approximately 4,800 campers, had participated in one of these 
programs.  Another approximately sixty campers had participated 
as individuals, without any church group. 
7 
 
 
Program camps are youth camps that typically run for one-
week sessions during the summer, and on weekends during the 
winter.  Each year, Hume NE hosts five summer program camps and 
approximately six winter program camps.  Hume NE provides food 
and lodging to program camp attendees and controls the entire 
camp experience.  This includes religious instruction, twice-
daily chapel sessions, performances by worship bands, and 
recreational activities such as canoeing, basketball, hiking, 
and ax throwing.  Hume views the camp's recreational activities 
as an important means of attracting interest in attending the 
camp.  Campers also participate in breakout sessions to discuss 
the morning chapel session with their counsellors, aided by 
written materials provided by Hume.  Hume develops a biblical 
theme each year for its program camps, with input from youth 
pastors, in order to connect with youth and encourage them 
toward faith.  Each theme is reviewed and approved by a 
credentialed theologian. 
 
When a church arranges to participate in a program camp, it 
typically brings its own congregation members, including adult 
counsellors.  Individual campers who do not sign up for program 
camps through a church are placed with Hume NE's independently 
hired counsellors.  Hume NE does not require attendees at 
program camps to sign the statement of beliefs or to profess a 
belief in Hume's tenets.  Attendees, however, must engage in all 
8 
 
activities, including chapel sessions.  Szablowski explained 
that these policies are in service of Hume's mission to bring 
religious faith to nonbelievers. 
Guest retreats take place on weekends approximately forty 
weeks each year.  Hume NE rents out its facilities to 
participating organizations, such as churches, ministries, and 
mission organizations, which in turn provide their own speakers, 
worship bands, and activities.  Individuals attend guest 
retreats through these organizations.  Hume NE provides 
staffing, lodging, meals, and recreation.  Each organization 
participating in a guest retreat is required to allow a 
representative of Hume NE to make a presentation and to share 
Hume's ministry with the group. 
 
Szablowski testified that he personally screened all groups 
interested in guest retreats to ensure that their beliefs were 
aligned with Hume's tenets.  He discussed the statement of 
beliefs with each group's ministry leader, required each group 
to sign both the statement of beliefs and a guest group 
contract, and ensured that each group's schedule included 
religious components, such as chapel sessions.  While 
organizations must do so, individual attendees at guest retreats 
are not required to sign the statement of beliefs, so as not to 
dissuade nonbelievers from attending. 
9 
 
 
c.  RV camp proposal.  In May 2019, Hume submitted to the 
board an application for site plan review for the construction 
of an RV camp on Hume NE's grounds.  In its application, Hume 
described the proposed project as a twelve-space camp to 
accommodate "temporary travel trailers, motorhomes, tents, and 
seasonal staff housing trailers."  These sites would be located 
in an area somewhat distant from the rest of the campground, but 
within walking distance of the other facilities.  The 
application explained that, "[a]lthough permanent buildings are 
part of Hume New England, they are significantly more expensive 
and require much more construction activity over a longer period 
of time." 
 
As set forth in the application, the RV camp would be used 
by three distinct groups of individuals, for three distinct 
purposes.  First, Hume proposed to use the RV camp for a new 
family camp program, which would provide families with a 
Christian camp experience while allowing them to remain in their 
own RVs.3  In addition, Hume proposed that the RV camp would be 
used to house volunteers working at Hume NE.  Finally, Hume's 
application proposed that the RV camp would be used to house 
seasonal, temporary staff during the summer months. 
 
3 The family camp program also could be used for adult camps 
hosted in RVs, such as men's or women's retreats. 
10 
 
 
d.  Monterey's zoning bylaw.  Under Monterey's zoning 
bylaw, "[a]ny non-municipal educational use or any religious use 
is subject to site plan review by the [board]."  The bylaw 
provides that "[n]o dwelling, structure or land or any part 
thereof shall be used for any purpose unless authorized."  The 
principal use of a "[t]railer or mobile home park" is prohibited 
in all zoning districts in Monterey. 
 
2.  Procedural background.  In July 2019, the board sent a 
letter denying Hume's application to construct the RV camp.  The 
decision explained:  "After careful consideration, the board 
voted at the meeting of 7/11/19 to reject the site plan on the 
grounds that the trailer park is not a customary religious use 
and should not fall under the umbrella of the Dover Amendment."  
The decision also stated:  "The next step is to get 
clarification from the Mass. Land [C]ourt on this matter for 
. . . future planning clarity." 
 
Hume timely appealed by filing a complaint in the Land 
Court.  The parties agreed that there were two issues to be 
decided at trial:  (1) whether Hume qualified for a religious 
use exemption in connection with Hume NE, and (2) whether Hume's 
proposed construction of an RV camp at Hume NE would be exempt 
from the zoning bylaw pursuant to G. L. c. 40A, § 3.  In an 
agreed statement of facts filed in the Land Court, the parties 
agreed that Hume "is a non-profit organization professing 
11 
 
dedication to the ministry of Christianity, with a particular 
emphasis on providing Christianity-based programs for all ages." 
 
Prior to trial, the judge conducted a view of Hume's 
property.  Trial proceeded by electronic audio-visual conference 
on April 13 and 14, 2021.  In April 2022, the judge issued a 
decision finding that Hume NE has a religiously significant goal 
that is the primary or dominant purpose for which the campground 
is used.  The judge overturned on this basis the board's 
determination that use of the RV camp for campers at the family 
camp program was not protected by the Dover Amendment. 
 
With respect to Hume's proposal to house volunteers and 
seasonal staff at the RV camp, however, the judge found that the 
board's decision was supported by the evidence at trial.  The 
judge concluded that Hume's purpose in allowing volunteers and 
seasonal staff to use the RV camp was primarily financial and 
that, hence, such use would not be protected under the Dover 
Amendment. 
 
3.  Discussion.  The Dover Amendment precludes a town or 
other municipality from adopting a zoning ordinance or bylaw 
that "prohibit[s], regulate[s] or restrict[s] the use of land or 
structures for religious purposes or for educational purposes on 
land owned or leased by . . . a religious sect or denomination, 
or by a nonprofit educational corporation."  G. L. c. 40A, § 3.  
See Martin v. Corporation of the Presiding Bishop of the Church 
12 
 
of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 434 Mass. 141, 147 (2001) 
(religious purposes); Trustees of Tufts College v. Medford, 415 
Mass. 753, 757 (1993) (educational purposes).  The Legislature 
has imposed this limitation in order to foreclose the "local 
exercise of preferences as to what kind of educational or 
religious uses will be welcome."  See Newbury Jr. College v. 
Brookline, 19 Mass. App. Ct. 197, 205 (1985).  By the same 
token, however, the Dover Amendment "honor[s] legitimate 
municipal concerns that typically find expression in local 
zoning laws" by "authoriz[ing] a municipality to adopt and apply 
'reasonable regulations' concerning bulk, dimensions, open space 
and parking, to land and structures for which a [protected] use 
is proposed."  Trustees of Tufts College, supra. 
 
The board argues that the judge erred in holding that the 
use of the RV camp to house families would be exempt under the 
Dover Amendment.  Hume argues instead that the judge erred in 
holding that the housing of volunteers and seasonal staff in the 
RV camp would not be exempt.  To address these arguments, we 
first must inquire whether the Dover Amendment's exemptions 
apply to Hume.  See Gardner-Athol Area Mental Health Ass'n v. 
Zoning Bd. of Appeals of Gardner, 401 Mass. 12, 15-16 (1987) 
(plaintiff was entitled to Dover Amendment protections because 
it was nonprofit educational corporation).  The Land Court judge 
answered this question in the affirmative, concluding that Hume 
13 
 
is a religious organization entitled to the protections of the 
Dover Amendment.  The board does not contest this finding on 
appeal.  See Regis College v. Weston, 462 Mass. 280, 284 (2012). 
 
This, however, does not settle the matter.  Just because an 
entity is a religious organization that qualifies for Dover 
Amendment exemptions, it does not follow necessarily that the 
entity uses its land or structures for a religious purpose.  See 
Shrine of Our Lady of La Salette Inc. v. Assessors of Attleboro, 
476 Mass. 690, 700 (2017).  To determine whether a proposed use 
of land or structures is exempt, we undertake two related -- and 
at times overlapping -- inquiries.  First, we ask whether the 
proposed use has as its "bona fide goal something that can 
reasonably be described as" religiously significant.  See Regis 
College, 462 Mass. at 285.  Second, we consider whether the 
religiously significant goal is the "'primary or dominant' 
purpose for which the land or structures will be used."  Id., 
quoting Whitinsville Retirement Soc'y, Inc. v. Northbridge, 394 
Mass. 757, 760 (1985).  The primary or dominant purpose 
requirement ensures that an ostensibly religious purpose is not 
"mere window dressing" for a nonexempt use (quotation omitted).  
See Regis College, supra at 287.  Whether a proposed use of land 
or structures is exempt under the Dover Amendment is a mixed 
question of law and fact, which we review de novo.  See McLean 
Hosp. Corp. v. Lincoln, 483 Mass. 215, 219 (2019) (Dover 
14 
 
Amendment analysis is mixed question of law and fact); McCarthy 
v. Slade Assocs., Inc., 463 Mass. 181, 190 (2012) ("[m]ixed 
questions of law and fact . . . generally receive de novo 
review" [citation omitted]). 
 
In undertaking these inquiries, our focus is on the 
proposed use of the land or structure, rather than on the land 
or structure itself.  See Worcester County Christian 
Communications, Inc. v. Board of Appeals of Spencer, 22 Mass. 
App. Ct. 83, 87 (1986).  In McLean Hosp. Corp., 483 Mass. at 
215-216, for example, the plaintiff proposed to use its land for 
a "residential program for adolescent males," and argued that 
such a use warranted exemption under the Dover Amendment because 
its purpose was educational.  We concluded that, even though the 
facilities in which the program would be housed did not resemble 
a "traditional school[]" or "college[]," the proposed program 
nonetheless had a predominantly educational purpose, because the 
facilities would be used to "teach[] . . . participants the 
skills necessary for their success" (citation omitted).  Id. at 
220, 225.  See Worcester County Christian Communications, Inc., 
supra (radio station, depending on its content, can serve 
educational purpose). 
We do not take a piecemeal approach to these inquiries.  
Rather, we ask "whether the [land or] structure as a whole is to 
be used for religious purposes."  See Martin, 434 Mass. at 149-
15 
 
150.  In Martin, supra at 150 n.19, for example, the judge 
inquired whether each of the particular rooms of a temple 
independently served a religious purpose.  We held that this 
"sort of particularized inquiry . . . is inappropriate."  Id. 
 
In addition, "religious purposes" encompass more than just 
"typical" religious uses, such as worship or religious 
instruction.  See Shrine of Our Lady of La Salette Inc., 476 
Mass. at 697.  The religious purposes exemption covers any use 
the primary or dominant purpose of which is to "aid . . . a 
system of faith and worship" (citation omitted).  See Martin, 
434 Mass. at 150.  See also Regis College, 462 Mass. at 285 ("We 
have refused to limit Dover Amendment protection to traditional 
or conventional educational regimes").  Notably, in determining 
whether a particular use of land or structures serves a 
religious purpose, we avoid making judgments as to whether a 
proposed use constitutes a "necessary element" of a particular 
religion, as that would constitute "an area of inquiry that the 
First Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits."  
See Martin, supra. 
 
We emphasize that the religious purposes exemption does not 
require that a proposed use be intrinsically religious in order 
to serve a religious purpose.  Rather, the exemption also 
encompasses "a variety of accessory uses" that, while not 
inherently religious in nature, are components of a broader 
16 
 
religious project, and that facilitate the functioning of that 
project.  See Needham Pastoral Counseling Ctr., Inc. v. Board of 
Appeals of Needham, 29 Mass. App. Ct. 31, 37 (1990).  We have 
suggested, for instance, that a "church parking lot" can be said 
to serve a religious purpose.  See Martin, 434 Mass. at 149.  
Similarly, a snack bar on a school's softball field may serve an 
educational purpose.  See Bible Speaks v. Board of Appeals of 
Lenox, 8 Mass. App. Ct. 19, 30, 34 (1979). 
 
We conclude that the proposed RV camp would have as its 
primary or dominant purpose a religiously significant goal, and 
so would be exempt under the Dover Amendment.  See Regis 
College, 462 Mass. at 284.  We reach this conclusion because, 
under Hume's proposal, the purpose of the RV camp would be to 
facilitate the operations of and strengthen attendance at 
Hume NE, whose mission is to cultivate religious practice and 
spiritual growth.  We note that the judge erred by inquiring 
into whether each individual use of the RV camp would be exempt 
under the Dover Amendment.  Rather, the RV camp is a single 
structure and therefore is subjected to a single instance of the 
religious purpose test.  See Martin, 434 Mass. at 149-150 & 
n.19.  We begin by discussing the housing of family attendees at 
the RV camp. 
 
a.  Use of RV camp for family camp program.  We conclude 
that the primary or dominant purpose of housing families at the 
17 
 
RV camp would be to serve Hume's religious mission by 
strengthening attendance at the proposed family camp program.  
The judge found that the family camp program would be centered 
around Hume's evangelical faith, with chapel, worship, and 
religious instruction interspersed with recreational activities 
throughout each day.  In addition, Hume NE would provide 
opportunities for intrafamily religious discussions.  The judge 
determined that the goal of the program is to promote the 
spirituality of the family unit.  See Regis College, 462 Mass. 
at 292-293 (fact finder permissibly could conclude that program 
served educational purpose on basis of plaintiff's affidavits 
about program's goals). 
 
Under Hume's proposal, families would reside at the RV camp 
solely to attend the family camp program; families not in 
attendance at the program would be excluded from the campground.  
Contrast Lasell Village, Inc. v. Assessors of Newton, 67 Mass. 
App. Ct. 414, 420, 423 (2006) (dominant purpose of retirement 
community was not educational in part because "residents were 
not required to devote a substantial portion of their time to 
educational pursuits").  Moreover, Hume anticipates that, by 
permitting families to bring their own RVs, the RV camp would 
present a less costly alternative to staying at one of the 
camp's lodges, rendering the family camp program more 
affordable.  The RV camp also would aid the family camp program 
18 
 
by serving as a location at which families would be expected to 
engage in scheduled religious discussions and spiritual 
reflection.  See Needham Pastoral Counseling Ctr., Inc., 29 
Mass. App. Ct. at 33.  The RV camp would thus strengthen 
attendance at and participation in the family camp program, in 
accordance with Hume's mission to "invest in the spiritual life 
. . . of the family."  See Regis College, 462 Mass. at 281, 292-
293 (residential facilities may serve educational purpose if 
residents engage in educational activities). 
 
The board maintains that families' use of the RV camp would 
not serve a religious purpose because staying in a trailer home 
is not a religious activity.  This argument applies the 
religious purposes test too narrowly.  See Martin, 434 Mass. at 
149.  As discussed, a use of land or structures can serve a 
religious purpose without itself being a form of religious 
practice.  See id. at 150 n.19.  Cooking food, for example, in 
itself may not be a religious activity, but a kitchen 
nonetheless serves a religious purpose if it is used to feed the 
members of a congregation.  See id. at 149-150.  Likewise, under 
Hume's proposal, the RV camp would provide lodging to families 
so that they could attend a religious camp program.  See Matter 
of Hapletah v. Assessor of Fallsburg, 79 N.Y.2d 244, 250-251 
(1992) ("If petitioner was unable to provide residential housing 
accommodations to its faculty, staff, students and their 
19 
 
families, its primary purposes of providing rigorous religious 
and educational instruction at the yeshivah would be seriously 
undermined"). 
 
Having determined that the purpose of housing families at 
the RV camp would be to advance Hume's religious mission, we 
next turn to whether the same can be said for the housing of 
volunteers and seasonal workers at the RV camp. 
 
b.  Use of RV camp to house volunteers and seasonal 
workers.  Hume contends that the primary or dominant purpose of 
housing volunteers and seasonal staff at the RV camp would be to 
facilitate the operation, maintenance, and improvement of 
Hume NE, and thereby supports Hume's religious mission.  We 
agree. 
The judge found that volunteers are a "critical part of the 
business model of Hume NE" and are "heavily relied upon" to 
perform work such as assisting with outdoor projects and 
maintenance.  At the time of trial, Hume NE was annually hosting 
approximately 200 volunteers, each of whom stayed at the camp 
anywhere from one day to one week or longer.  Szablowski 
testified that having two volunteers stay in an RV at Hume NE 
for eight weeks during the summer would save the camp 
approximately $8,600 annually. 
 
In housing volunteers at the RV camp, Hume's goal is for 
Hume NE to benefit from their labor.  Under Hume's proposal, the 
20 
 
RV camp would provide volunteers with "a place to stay when 
permanent housing is not available due to the camp being 
otherwise full."  In addition, Harris testified that groups of 
Christian volunteers sometimes travel together in their RVs and 
work in exchange for the use of a camp's RV site; the RV camp 
therefore could entice itinerant volunteers to donate their 
labor to the camp. 
 
The same reasoning applies to Hume's proposed use of the RV 
camp to house seasonal staff during the summer.  Seasonal staff 
at Hume NE, a category that includes camp counsellors, kitchen 
staff, and grounds people, perform work that is necessary to the 
camp's operations.  See Shrine of Our Lady of La Salette Inc., 
476 Mass. at 697 (cafeteria and bistro were "connected with 
religious worship" because "[p]ilgrims and visitors who spend 
hours at the [s]hrine need to eat and drink" [quotation and 
citation omitted]).  See also Bible Speaks, 8 Mass. App. Ct. at 
30 ("feeding and housing of college personnel" serve educational 
purpose).  Furthermore, according to Hume's application, by 
providing supplemental housing to workers during the summer, the 
RV camp would allow Hume NE to use its limited number of beds 
for paying campers rather than for staff, expanding the capacity 
of the camp. 
 
Because Hume NE exists to advance Hume's religious mission, 
it follows that the purpose of housing volunteers and seasonal 
21 
 
workers at the RV camp is a religiously significant goal.  See 
Needham Pastoral Counseling Ctr., Inc., 29 Mass. App. Ct. at 37 
(accessory uses may be encompassed by religious purposes 
exemption).  The judge held otherwise, finding that even though 
Hume NE has a predominantly religious purpose, volunteers' tasks 
are nonetheless "secular in nature" and "bear no relation to 
Hume's religious mission other than reducing Hume NE's operating 
costs."  As discussed, however, this application of the 
religious purposes test is too narrow.  A religious organization 
may depend upon secular tasks, such as the provision of food and 
housing, in order to operate effectively.  See Shrine of Our 
Lady of La Salette Inc., 476 Mass. at 697.  See also Corporation 
of the Presiding Bishop of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter 
Day Saints v. Ashton, 92 Idaho 571, 574-575 (1968), quoting 
Matter of the Community Synagogue v. Bates, 1 N.Y.2d 445, 453 
(1956) ("To limit a church to being merely a house of prayer and 
sacrifice would, in a large degree, be depriving the church of 
the opportunity of enlarging, perpetuating and strengthening 
itself and the congregation").  If each use of land or 
structures itself had to be a "religious" use, it would be 
virtually "impossible" for any organization to benefit from the 
Dover Amendment's religious purposes exemption.  See Martin, 434 
Mass. at 149. 
22 
 
 
This court's broad understanding of what constitutes a 
"religious purpose" is set forth in some detail in Shrine of Our 
Lady of La Salette Inc., 476 Mass. at 695.  There, a religious 
organization sought a tax exemption for a maintenance building 
that stored maintenance vehicles and equipment used to maintain 
its property, as well as religious items.  See id.  We concluded 
that the maintenance building had a dominant purpose that was 
"connected with religious worship and instruction," because 
"maintaining the [s]hrine and its grounds . . . is connected 
with the religious worship and instruction offered at [the 
property]."  See id. at 699-700.  Here, similarly, volunteers 
and seasonal workers would reside at the RV camp in order to 
assist in maintaining the camp's property and operating its 
programs.  Accordingly, this use of the RV camp would be 
connected to the camp's religious purpose. 
 
The board argues that the judge properly affirmed the 
denial of Hume NE's application because, as the judge reasoned, 
Hume NE is primarily motivated to house volunteers and seasonal 
staff at the RV camp in order to defray costs, rather than for 
religious purposes.  This is because, the board maintains, as 
Szablowski testified, housing workers at the RV camp would allow 
Hume NE to avoid the costs associated with constructing more 
permanent buildings. 
23 
 
 
This argument misconstrues the religious purposes test.  
The board focuses on Hume NE's decision to house workers in RVs 
rather than in permanent housing.  The focus of this court's 
analysis, however, has never been on an organization's reason 
for choosing one means of pursuing its goals rather than 
another.  See Martin, 434 Mass. at 150 (once it is determined 
that sacred ceremonies are conducted in temples, "[n]o further 
inquiry as to the applicability of the Dover Amendment [to a 
temple] was warranted").  Rather, we look to the purpose of the 
particular use to which the land or structure is put.  See id. 
at 149.  Here, the reason that Hume NE wants to house workers in 
the RV camp is so that their labor may assist the camp in 
carrying out its religious goals.  Accordingly, this use of the 
RV camp would serve a religious purpose.  See Worcester County 
Christian Communications, Inc., 22 Mass. App. Ct. at 87 ("focus 
must be placed on the use of the structure"). 
 
c.  Hume's religion mission.  The board argues that, even 
if the RV camp would serve Hume NE in carrying out its 
operations, this would not constitute a religiously significant 
goal because Hume NE's primary or dominant purpose is 
recreation, and not religious practice. 
 
We disagree with the board's characterization of Hume NE's 
purpose.  As the judge found, the primary or dominant purpose of 
Hume NE is to serve Hume's evangelical mission.  Harris and 
24 
 
Szablowski, in testimony that the judge found credible and 
honest statements of belief, described Hume NE's purpose as 
being to cultivate religious experiences for believers and 
nonbelievers alike.  See Commonwealth v. DeMinico, 408 Mass. 
230, 244 (1990) ("Questions of credibility are . . . for the 
trial judge to resolve" [citation omitted]).  This purpose is 
clearly set forth in Hume's mission statement, which articulates 
Hume's desire that "each person coming into contact with 
[Hume's] ministry will . . . [a]ccept Jesus Christ as their 
personal Savior."  See Commissioner of Code Inspection of 
Worcester v. Worcester Dynamy, Inc., 11 Mass. App. Ct. 97, 99 
(1980) (nonprofit corporation's belief that its program serves 
educational goals is "entitled to due weight"). 
 
The camp's programming, which is directed and controlled by 
Hume NE, bears out this purpose.  See Regis College, 462 Mass. 
at 292.  Program camp attendees are required to participate in 
two chapel sessions each day and to receive religious 
instruction in accordance with a biblical theme that is reviewed 
by a theologian.  See id. (mandatory academic requirement of 
"two academic courses each semester" bolstered assertion that 
program served educational purpose).  Contrast Needham Pastoral 
Counseling Ctr., Inc., 29 Mass. App. Ct. at 36 (program does not 
serve religious purpose in part because "[c]ounselors do not 
espouse to their clients any particular religious doctrine").  
25 
 
Similarly, the camp's guest retreats are available only to 
organizations that agree to abide by a schedule that includes 
religious components.  According to Szablowski, he rejected at 
least three groups from participating in a guest retreat, two 
because they were secular organizations, and one because its 
humanist theology was inconsistent with Hume's statement of 
beliefs. 
 
The board maintains that, because recreation, rather than 
religious practice, is the primary draw for campers in choosing 
to attend the camp, Hume's religious mission cannot be described 
as Hume NE's primary or dominant purpose.  The board points to 
Szablowski's testimony that the camp would "have a difficult 
time attracting families" in the absence of recreational 
activities.  The board additionally observes that campers are 
not required to belong to a church or profess a particular faith 
in order to attend the camp. 
 
We are not persuaded.  Although the recreational activities 
"conducted on the [camp's] properties are [not] inherently 
religious in nature," they nonetheless serve to promote Hume's 
religious goals.  See Maurer v. Young Life, 779 P.2d 1317, 1327, 
1331-1332 (Colo. 1989) ("by engaging the attention of young 
persons in camping activities and then directing the youths' 
attention to the religious meaning to be gleaned from these 
experiences the entire camping experience becomes a form of 
26 
 
religious worship").  As discussed, the religious purposes 
exemption is not limited to uses that are typical of or inherent 
to religious institutions.  See Shrine of Our Lady of La Salette 
Inc., 476 Mass. at 697-698.  The judge found that Hume NE offers 
recreational activities in order to boost interest in the camp's 
religious offerings, as well as to cultivate an environment in 
which individuals are likely to develop their faith.  See 
Cummington Sch. of the Arts, Inc. v. Assessors of Cummington, 
373 Mass. 597, 605 (1977) ("The fact that participants spent 
part of their time in recreational activities would not 
undermine a use which is otherwise educational").  See also 
Supervisor of Assessments of Carroll County v. Peter & John 
Radio Fellowship, Inc., 274 Md. 353, 356-363 (1975) (children's 
camp was "used for religious purposes," notwithstanding its 
"western frontier theme" that was used to attract young campers 
who were "not running with glee to hear the Gospel or [to go] to 
church"). 
Further, to the extent that Hume NE allows "nonbelievers" 
to attend camp programs, it does so in service of 
proselytization.  As Szablowski testified, "if we were only to 
allow believers here, this would be more of a . . . club and not 
really meet that evangelistic nature."  See Lutherans Outdoors 
in S.D., Inc. v. South Dakota State Bd. of Equalization, 475 
N.W.2d 140, 146 (S.D. 1991) (whether purpose of summer camp is 
27 
 
religious is not determined by "the percentage of religious 
society members among those who make use of the facility").  
Contrast Needham Pastoral Counseling Ctr., Inc., 29 Mass. App. 
Ct. at 36 (counselling program does not serve religious purpose 
in part because counsellors "do not proselytize"). 
 
We conclude that the primary or dominant purpose of Hume NE 
is to advance Hume's evangelical mission.  Because all of the 
proposed uses of the RV camp would serve to aid Hume NE in 
carrying out this mission, we further conclude that the primary 
or dominant purpose of the RV camp would be a religiously 
significant goal.  Accordingly, the proposed RV camp would be an 
exempt use under the Dover Amendment.4 
 
4.  Conclusion.  The judgment of the Land Court affirming 
the planning board's determination is vacated and set aside.  
The matter is remanded to the Land Court for entry of a judgment 
finding that the proposed RV park would be an exempt religious 
use and for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
So ordered. 
 
 
4 Because we conclude that the RV camp is subject to the 
religious purposes exemption, we do not address Hume's argument 
that the RV camp additionally would serve a religious purpose by 
exposing volunteers and seasonal staff to opportunities for 
spiritual growth.