A threefold disjunction. The passage runs through three possibilities for the gods' relation to events — and shows that on any of them the practical conclusion is one and the same. The governing discipline is desire (to accept what happens); the sustaining one is action (the rational-social nature → service to the cities).
(1) The gods provide for the individual. If the gods deliberated about me, they "DOGMAdeliberated well" (καλῶς ἐβουλεύσαντο): a god without forethought (ἄβουλος) cannot even be conceived, and they have no reason to harm me (what advantage to them or the Whole?). (2) The gods provide for the Whole. If not about me individually, then about the DOGMAWhole — and then what happens "by sequence" (κατ’ ἐπακολούθησιν) I ought to DOGMAwelcome and love (ἀσπάζεσθαι καὶ στέργειν) as a link in the common chain. (3) The gods provide for nothing. To believe this is impious (else sacrifice, prayer, oaths are meaningless); but even granting it, "I can deliberate about myself" — and beneficial to each is what accords with its own TERMconstitution and nature.
The rational-social nature and the two cities. All three branches converge on one point: "my TERMnature is rational and social" (λογικὴ καὶ πολιτική). Hence the famous formula of double citizenship: "as DOGMAAntoninus1, my country is Rome; as a human being, the cosmos." Rome is the particular polis of Marcus-the-emperor; the cosmopolis is the homeland of Marcus-the-human. And the criterion of the good: good for me is only what is useful to these two cities. Private benefit is dissolved into the common.
Parallels. The DOGMAcosmopolis — Med. 4.4 (the sorites: common reason → common law → we are fellow-citizens); 03-11; the doctrines of DOGMAprovidence and DOGMAamor fati; the disjunction "providence or atoms" — 04-27; cf. 06-10. The rational-social nature — 05-29.