Religious Intolerance in the Later Roman Empire - Bad request ...

property to another who would then be able to perform the liturgies for the person
who had joined the Jewish priesthood. 297
Therefore this law gives the impression of being both tolerant and intolerant at
the same time. Tolerant because it applied the same conditions on applicants for the
Jewish priesthood as already existed for those to the Christian priesthood, but also
intolerant because it appeared to be somewhat dismissive of the Jews and also, more
importantly, because in order for Jewish clerics to be “truly dedicated to God” they
had to fulfil the same criteria of (effective) poverty as did Christians. The law appears
to indicate that the authorities had an attitude that in order for a religion to be
regarded as legitimate it had to have the same attitudes and approaches as had
Christianity.
At the same time however, it should be remembered that previous laws on this
subject have given the impression that the government was more concerned with
ensuring that the councils were not unduly drained of manpower and resources by the
Church. In all probability therefore, and in action, the primary concern of the
government would have been in ensuring that the councils’ were able to function.
Nevertheless it is difficult to escape the impression that for Jewish priests to be
regarded as such they had to fulfil some of the criteria (i.e. poverty), that Christians
also had to fulfil.
Gratian and Apostates
The creation of a category of apostates in the legislation is testament to the
growth of Christianity in the fourth century as well as to a desire to ensure that such
growth was not impeded through defections. CTh. 16.7.3 of 21 May 383 was Gratian’s
only law on apostates and it was also his last on religious affairs. It was addressed to
297 quisquis igitur v ere deo dicatus est
169