Yes, but for the grace of God go I, in other words, without the grace of God, I would not be sober.
A good definition of grace is:
benevolence towards humanity, bestowed freely and without regard to merit, and which manifests in the giving of blessings and granting of salvation (OED)
It is not that we do not merit grace because we are bad but that we do not need to earn it individually; it's established up front for everyone; it's an equal opportunity gift; it is given freely. That means that people who do not get sober have as much grace available as me. No more, no less. That's its nature. If it were selective, it would be a reward or the throw of a die, not grace.
There are many events that I did not occasion that were necessary for me to get and stay sober. That's one aspect of grace. A second aspect of grace is the recovered state of sanity and safety.
If this is seen as the only factor, however, there is a danger that I will neglect my own responsibility.
I have agency over my own decision-making: the voice of God was periodically there throughout my whole life. But was I going to listen to it? No, until my life collapsed.
I play a key role in my own recovery, firstly by heeding the call of God, secondly by committing to particular courses of action, and thirdly by following through.
The Big Book concedes that there are people who cannot or will not commit and follow through. They lack the ability or they lack the willingness. It's impossible to tell which is operative or to speculate reliably as to someone else's inner workings. But the Book is also big on highlighting our own personal responsibility.
We are enjoined not to judge (in the sense of condemn or have contempt for) those who relapse, which is right and good. But I don't think we're doing a service to newcomers or relapsers to suggest simply that they keep coming back 'until they get it'; as though sobriety is a gift that is received in God's time, and God is choosing some people to be sober and some people to die; as though there isn't a defined programme to help us get there; as though there aren't certain courses of action inimical to recovery.
We offer what we offer to everyone who comes through the doors. Once it's been offered, they've 'got' it. That part is over. Now they've got it, what are they going to do with it? Are they going to buy the ideas, make a decision, and follow through? That's entirely in the hands of the individual.
In the few months I was relapsing in 1993, I didn't not 'get' it': I was given 'it', but I preferred my own way. I decided not to work the Steps. How do I know? Because I did not work the Steps.
We are not responsible for the illness, but we are responsible for what we do about it. It is true that the ego is very strong in some people and is preventing them from admitting their way of living is not working, and another way—if adopted wholeheartedly—will work better. However, rather than just patting people on the head and hoping heartily that they will 'get it' one day, I believe we render people a more effective service by helping them understand what is going on with the insane resistance to the solution, to see the flaw in the conditioned system, and to decide differently.
We can't force people to surrender, but we can be part of creating the conditions that make surrender more likely.