The theological argument for our thesis may be formulated thus: The gratuity of grace does not imply that the recipient must have no sort of disposition. It merely means that man is positively unworthy of divine favor. Otherwise the Church could not teach, as she does, that the grace bestowed on the angels and on our first parents in Paradise was absolutely gratuitous, nor could she hold that the Hypostatic Union of the two natures in Christ, which is the pattern and exemplar of all true grace,(463) was a pure grace in respect of the humanity of our Lord. The dogma of the gratuity of grace is in no danger whatever so long as the relation between negative disposition and supernatural grace is conceived as actual (_facienti=qui facit_), not causal (_facienti=quia facit_). The motive for the distribution of grace is to be sought not in the dignity of human nature, but in God’s will to save all men. We must, however, guard against the erroneous notion that grace is bestowed according to a fixed law or an infallible norm regulating the amount of grace in accordance with the condition of the recipient. Sometimes great sinners are miraculously converted, while others of fairly good antecedents perish. Yet, again, who could say that to the omniscient and all-wise God the great sinner did not appear better fitted to receive grace than the “decent” but self-sufficient pharisee? READINGS:—Hurter, _Compendium Theologiae Dogmaticae_, Vol. III, thes. 187.—Oswald, _Lehre von der Heiligung_, § 8, Paderborn 1885.—*Palmieri, _De Gratia Divina Actuali_, c. 3, Gulpen 1885.—Heinrich-Gutberlet, _Dogmatische Theologie_, Vol. VIII, § 417-420, Mainz 1897.—Chr. Pesch, _Praelectiones Dogmaticae_, Vol. V, 3rd ed., pp. 105 sqq., Freiburg 1908.—Schiffini, _De Gratia Divina_, pp. 468 sqq., Freiburg 1901. Section 3. The Universality Of Actual Grace The gratuity of grace does not conflict with its universality. Though God distributes His graces freely, He grants them to all men without exception, because He wills all to be saved. This divine “will to save” (_voluntas Dei salvifica_) may be regarded in relation either to the wayfaring state or to the _status termini_. Regarded from the first-mentioned point of view it is a merciful will (_voluntas misericordiae_) and is generally called first or antecedent will (_voluntas prima s. antecedens_) or God’s salvific will (_voluntas Dei salvifica_) in the strict sense of the word. Considered in relation to the _status termini_, it is a just will, as God rewards or punishes each creature according to its deserts. This second or consequent will (_voluntas secunda s. consequens_) is called “predestination” in so far as it rewards the just, and “reprobation” in so far as it punishes the wicked.