As Rives discusses in his chapter on Religion and Community, an individual’s religious status often largely reflected their status in their society in general. For example, an individual who happened to own a successful shop in town would also likely operate as a key actor in the cities religious affairs. This is likely caused by the fact that, like the Greeks, early Roman religion attributed the success of individuals as well as the empire at large to a correct and pious relationship with the gods. This relationship was viewed by the Romans as a sort of two way street, in that they worshiped correctly and as a result were shown favor by the gods. Which in turn caused them to give proper thanks to the gods, ensuring a continuation of this favor. This relationship is captured well in On the Nature of the Gods, written by Cicero who states, “We give thanks to the gods when we achieve political office or some benefit to our family estate, or if we happen upon some good or avoid some misfortune, and we do not think that our own reputation has been enhanced. Did anyone ever give thanks to the gods because he was a good man? No, he did so because he is rich, honored and secure. Jupiter is called ‘Best and Greatest’ not because he makes men just, moderate and wise, but because he makes them healthy, secure, wealthy and prosperous.” (Warrior, 1.30, pg. 11) In this passage Cicero makes it clear that whether the success is felt by the individual or society at large, it is due to good favor with the gods. As such, it would have seemed silly to have anyone besides the most prosperous members of society be in charge of religious worship. While there were some voluntary associations that were lead by women, slaves, and freedmen, these were largely fringe associations or those that weren’t necessarily of great import. The collegiums that were vital to the success of the entire empire were ran by the socio-economic elite, and as Rives discussed, “Wealth was thus a formal requirement for holding public office, and an important part of serving as a magistrate or public priest was using that wealth on behalf of the populace.”(Rives, pg. 115)

These social hierarchies were echoed in the household, as the father of the household was in charge of caring for the household cult as well as honoring his dead ancestors. These household cults were organized into hierarchical relationships of master and slave, husband and wife, and father and child. Even if a father and husband made a modest living, he still had access to more of his societies resources than his wife, children, or slaves did. Just like it was the job of the top of the socio-economic tree to care for the empire-wide cults, it was the job of the leader of the household to care for the traditional cults of the household.