Stace does not say that he agrees with the theory that the world is a moral order. Instead, he is simply describing the point of view that the world is a moral order, and he is claiming that religious worldviews always see the world in this way. Stace presents no arguments to support the idea that the world is a moral order. He is not trying to convince us that the world really is a moral order as the religious point of view would have it.

Stace tells us exactly what he means by the theory that the world is a moral order. He says it means that some values are objective rather than subjective. So, Stace is telling us that religious points of view always hold that values are objective rather than subjective.

	That is all that he means. He does not imply that if the world is a moral order, then values must be determined by the command of God.
	One possible example of a way of seeing values as objective is to see them as determined by the commands of God. But that is just one example. Other religious theories about the objectivity of values are plentiful, and Stace is aware of that variety of viewpoints.

Stace tells us exactly what he means when he describes religious viewpoints as holding that values are objective. For values to be objective is for values to be matters of fact that are not determined by what people think or desire.

One example of a theory that holds that values are objective is the theory that says values are determined by the commands of God, or the intentions of God, or by God’s will. Another example is the theory that says the morally right thing is always whatever produces the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people.

For values to be subjective rather than objective is for values to depend on what people think or desire.

One example of a subjective value theory is the theory that holds that all values are determined by what society thinks. Another example is the theory that says what is moral or valuable for me is whatever I desire.

Notice that when values are objective, it does not follow that everyone agrees about what things are valuable or right. It is entirely possible for values to be objective even though most people have false beliefs about what things are valuable or right.

If the world is a moral order (i.e., some values are objective), that does not imply anything about whether or not people around the world are getting or obeying orders from anyone or from God. The word “order” in the phrase “moral order” has nothing to do with the giving or receiving of orders.