Did Marcus Aurelius believe in providence?

Broadly yes, though he repeatedly tests action with the “providence or atoms” alternative.

Can an atheist practise Stoicism?

They can use its judgement and ethical exercises while naming differences from ancient cosmology.

Does this prove religion is irrelevant?

No. It shows only that some practical reasons can cross belief systems.

Meditations

“Either providence or atoms”: can you read Meditations without believing in cosmic purpose?

Meditations 4.3 offers ‘providence or atoms’: readers can reject ancient cosmology while distinguishing its beliefs, arguments and shareable actions.

Renew the alternatives: either providence or atoms.Meditations 4.3

Direct answer: yes; the phrase itself looks for common ground for action across rival pictures of the cosmos

4.3 presents “providence or atoms”. Marcus favours an ordered cosmos, yet his practical question is: whether events arise from purpose or material causation, how can I preserve judgement, justice and cooperation now?

Do not pretend to accept all his metaphysics

Read in three layers: what the text believes, what its argument depends on, and which reasons for action survive if you do not share that belief. You may reject providence while accepting interdependence, consequences and the need to justify choices.

Try a two-path test

For one uncontrollable event, write how you would respond if it belonged to a wider order, then how you would respond if it arose from causation and chance. Circle shared actions: check facts, protect people, repair what can be repaired, and accept remaining uncertainty.

Boundary: a shared conclusion must not disguise different arguments

“Either way it is all the same” is too easy. Worldviews affect prayer, responsibility, grief and meaning. Preserve genuine disagreement and meet only where actions truly overlap. That neither forces belief nor recasts an ancient author as a modern secular thinker.