An examination of a few of the more “straightforward” possibilities that Rousseau knew and rejected may cast light on the dimensions of the quandary with which he presents us. In Discourses on Livy, Book I, chapters 11–15, Machiavelli makes even clearer than Rousseau does the standard by which a real civil religion is to be judged: That standard is the use to which paganism was put by the Roman republic. Machiavelli provides ample lessons in these five chapters of what it is to make prudent use of a religion, both politically and militarily, but “the Roman Church,” failing to live up to its name, is incapable of doing this, and, like the Samnites in Discourses I.15, stirs up religious terror to no purpose. Machiavelli's criticism of the papacy is evident in the contrast he draws in Book I, chapter 14 between Papirius's shrewd manipulation of religious beliefs and Appius Pulcher's blatant disregard of those beliefs. The Roman court, because it is blatantly un-Christian, spreads contempt for its own religion, like Appius Pulcher, whereas it ought to be using Christian piety for political purposes, in emulation of the policy of Papirius.

Machiavelli makes perfectly clear throughout his discussions of religion in the Discourses that Christianity has tremendous civilizational resources at its disposal – to discipline its subjects, to carve “a beautiful statue…from coarse marble,” but it has squandered these resources in the most appalling way. It has, as he argues in Discourses II.2, devalued honor and glorified passive martyrdom; has taught men to be humble, self-abnegating, and contemptuous of worldly things; has made the world effeminate and rendered heaven impotent. In sum, Christianity has celebrated slavishness and encouraged human beings to despise liberty, or the harsh politics required for the defense of liberty. Religion lies at the heart of Machiavellian politics, though this might not be immediately apparent to readers of The Prince. In a famous passage in The Prince, chapter 12, Machiavelli asserts the precedence of good arms over good laws because “where there are good arms there must be good laws.” But Machiavelli, in a parallel passage in Discourses I.11, continues his reasoning (as if in completion of a half-uttered thought): “where there is religion, arms can easily be introduced, and where there are arms and not religion, the latter can be introduced only with difficulty.” Just as arms take precedence over laws, religion takes precedence over arms. Hence Numa, founder of Rome's religion, takes precedence over Romulus: It was Numa who addressed himself to “things omitted” by Romulus and saw to it that “the orders of Romulus” were reordered in such a way that they would “suffice for such an empire.” We see, then, that the business of founding states reposes on the more basic business of founding religions.