Can the Wesleyan Covenant Prayer be tweaked to fit today’s context and theological sensibilities?
The Covenant Prayer, 1780ish
In United Methodist churches, the first worship service of a new year often includes a Wesleyan Covenant Renewal Service. This service reaffirms the Covenant between the Christian worshippers and God, and names the ways how we affirm and deny that relationship.
One part of the service is reciting the Covenant Prayer, attributed to Wesley but the original has been lost, a version of which is this:
I am no longer my own, but thine.
Put me to what thou wilt, rank me with whom thou wilt.
Put me to doing, put me to suffering.
Let me be employed for thee or laid aside for thee,
exalted for thee or brought low for thee.
Let me be full, let me be empty.
Let me have all things, let me have nothing.
I freely and heartily yield all things to thy pleasure and disposal.
And now, O glorious and blessed God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit,
thou art mine, and I am thine.
So be it.
And the covenant which I have made on earth,
let it be ratified in heaven.
Amen.
A Contractual Relationship…for whom?
While writing the worship service for my church in the None Zone, it struck me that the Covenant Prayer’s Pre-Christian language makes some theological claims that I find problematic for my Post-Christian context:
It is clearly commendable to begin the year with renewed commitment and dedication regardless of what the future may have in store. But the Methodist liturgy goes much further. Taken at face value in traditional form it strongly implies that our misfortunes may arise at the divine behest (‘Put me to what thou wilt, put me to suffering’ etc.) Would we suggest that to a friend in distress or to someone entrusted to us for counselling? I hope not. Rather our conviction is that God is our comforter in time of trouble rather than the author of life’s woes.
Indeed we may legitimately ask whether the essential concept of covenant as a mutually binding contract (‘now you are mine and I am yours’) has been inappropriate from the very outset as a symbol of divine grace. By definition covenant goes beyond simple promise, conferring rights on an injured party in the breach. It stems from our fickle human nature, demanding guarantees and imposing conditions. Witness contemporary covenant practice legal and commercial.
While I am a Wesleyan Christian and embrace our multiple Covenants, I push back against the determinism aspects of Wesley’s theology. To that topic, the whole Prayer smacks a bit of “everything that happens is God’s will and we should give ourselves over to it.”
As a colleague wrote to me on this topic:
I don’t think God gives people cancer or puts people in car accidents or makes them not get on the plane that eventually crashes, and the people are hearing this from almost every other “Christian” resource. [Wesleyans] walk a tightrope between “I have no agency” and “God is just an accessory in my totally independent life.”
I wonder if the ancient language could be revised and the theology tweaked to better bring Wesleyanism again to a generation and context that needs a robust counter to Purpose-Driven Best Life Now Lifeway theology.
Wesley’s Covenant Prayer, revised
To address these concerns for my congregation and for post-Christian or non-Christian newcomers, this is my revision of the short version of Wesley’s Covenant Prayer. It’s more in the spirit of the Message translation of the Bible: it’s a paraphrase in common language, not a word-for-word replacement. Here it is:
I am not my own self-made, self-reliant human being.
In truth, O God, I am Yours.
Make me into what You will.
Make me a neighbor with those whom You will.
Guide me on the easy path for You.
Guide me on the rocky road for You.
Whether I am to step up for You or step aside for You;
Whether I am to be lifted high for You or brought low for You;
Whether I become full or empty, with all things or with nothing;
I give all that I have and all that I am for You.
So be it.
And may I always remember that you, O God, and I belong to each other. Amen.
(Note: as with everything on the site, you are welcome to use this without permission but with attribution .)
Your Turn
Revising ancient language is always tricky, so feel free to comment if you see sentiments that do not make the translation well. This blog has done similar work previously that shows the clash between ancient language and current Missional contexts:
- Seeing Communion again for the first time
- A Dr. Seuss Communion
- Why Creeds are not Useful in Worship
- Reversing Wesley: Wesleyanism in an Upside-Down World?
Thoughts?
Thanks for reading, commenting, and your shares on social media.
A quibble: I was taught that the ‘suffering’ of the original had the meaning of ‘waiting’ rather than ‘wallowing in freakish misery’ (or some such). That’s why it’s paired with ‘doing.’ I use a slightly amended original version, but clarifying 18 the century language is important.
That’s helpful, Clay. I wasn’t aware of that meaning, but it does help the original!
Yeah, think of “long-suffering” which is usually translated in modern terms as patience.
I do think there is something to a more literal interpretation of suffering that invites us to take up our cross, however. The suffering in this sense would not be accidents/illness/misfortune, but the suffering that comes because we are living faithfully and pushing against a world that prefers to turn its back on God. Contextually, that doesn’t fit well with the “doing” that it is paired with, however, but more the spirit of the whole prayer (laid aside, have nothing, ranked as thou wilt, brought low)
Jeremy, I know this is not faithful to Wesley’s version, or whomever wrote this. And I appreciate your version and believe we might use it Sunday. As I ruminate… here’s my own creation… thanks for helping me think about what I believe:
I am beautifully and wonderfully made, and I am grateful to my Creator. You, Holy One, know my name, because you gifted me life. In thanksgiving and praise, I will claim the gift of life and grace, living in word and action to make the world a better place, a more peaceful community.
I believe there will be times when this path is wondrous and easy; I believe there will be times when this path is crazy hard. Give me courage, no matter which it is, to be faithful, even when I am afraid. Give me strength, even when I feel like running away or giving up. With all that I have and all that I am, I believe that I am yours, Source of Life and Light. And I believe you are mine.
Love this. TY for sharing. I am definitely going to copy for my own use.
This one is just beautiful.
I don’t mind the updating of the language, but I’ve always taken the “put me to suffering” in the light of Jesus’ comments in John 9:3. To me, the whole tone of Wesley’s prayer was always from the point of view of one, who was a mature disciple in Christ, turning over her very life and self so that God’s glory can be revealed in whatever way God needed it to be.
Apparently “robust” relevant and sensitive theological Methodism finds the Trinity uncomfortable and God knows we do not not want to be made uncomfortable by any idea that God does not accommodate our sensitivities! We want a Divine Life Coach that ask nothing of us especially in idea of salvation being incarnated let alone crucified and heaven forbid resurrected! We want any idea that we miss the mark, or Spong forbid, sin, removed lest we create neurosis and worst of all guilt! Lastly let us be certain that any idea of the sovereign nature of our Loving God that suggest we are not equal in being and self awareness be utterly removed from any covenant which is a patriarchal term and should be replaced with oh perhaps just a no fault pre nuptial.
What Andrew said.
With the added observation that the prayers last line about pray-er and God belonging to each other make it clear who has the ultimate authority in this relationship.
I guess rewriting the old rubric about the minister taking Communion first as “he being chief of sinners is in most need of grace” would go something like this : “he or she being the most likely to fail the life coach directives he or she is in most need of redirection and the communal meal for which he or she acts as president and or leader for its celebration style”
We need to find some modus vivendi with a God who could prevent suffering but a God who does not do so. It’s the old theodicy issue. From the depths of personal anguish it might indeed be more meaningful to accept suffering as ordained rather than sweeping the issue of God’s non-salvation under the carpet?
When I have experienced intense suffering there has been a glimmer of hope that perhaps this senseless, monstrous evil has some usefulness in some unknown arena or dimension, and that God has indeed “put me to suffering” and “let me have nothing”. Job’s glimmer. don’t take it away – that might perhaps be being one of the false friends?
I appreciate attempts to point to the partnership (theosis) behind the “perfection” (wholeness) language. This is still hierarchical with all the “worminess) inherent in such. I’ll be interested to see where next year’s paraphrase ends up.
I appreciate the freshness of language that will help everyone connect in their daily lives to this prayer. Although for this old UM pastor there is a nostalgia to the old words that are a blessing to my heart. My quibble would be with the word guide. I recognize the word is used in the sense of God guiding and directing. My fear is that it would take away from the reality of God as Lord. I know that is troublesome language for many. However when we remove a deeper sense of Lordship are we making God into a human guide? I don’t have a better suggestion but merely a question of how words can lead to unintended consequences. Nice thinking on making the prayer accessible to our people.
Modern translation appeared okay, but concerned of removing “And now, O glorious and blessed God, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit” implies that the trinity has no place in today’s liberal culture.
Think about the impact the Holy Trinity “Father Son, and the Holy Spirit” had in the life of Wesley and thereafter. Gender names (naming God in His proper name) in liberal denominations is a problem. They still cannot do away with what we called, “the Lord’s Prayer” where the phrase “Our Father…..” causes hypocrisy and tongues are twisted when the Lord’s Prayer is prayed in services . Denying the presence and reality of Father, Son and the Holy Spirit” should not play games in Wesley Covenant. Let Wesley be Wesley in his own understanding of the Holy Trinity by their proper names.
Thanks, Jeremy. I like it. One suggestion: The ending — we belong to each other has more of an ownership feel than I am yours and you are mine which has more of a love feel (might be said at a wedding or when family members will be separated).
Brand new to this blog and to this conversation, but I felt compelled to comment because this is a really fascinating topic. I love the original prayer, and it doesn’t seem to me to need much in the way of updating, except for removing some of the archaic language that makes it hard(er) to read.
Why not just something like:
I am no longer mine, but yours.
Put me to what you want, place me where you will.
Put me to doing, put me to waiting.
Let me be employed for your or set aside by you,
exalted for you or brought low for you.
Let me be full, let me be empty.
Let me have all things, let me have nothing.
I freely and heartily yield all things to your pleasure and will.
And now, O glorious and blessed God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit,
you are mine, and I am yours.
So be it.
And the covenant which I have made on earth,
let it be ratified in heaven.
Amen.
I’ve never understood the “you are mine and I am yours” to be contractual. To me they seem mutual promises, the way they should be.
In general, I have no problem with acknowledging the potential difficulties in archaic language or updating it. My take, however, is to try to redeem the language by understanding how it came to be, rather than in throwing it out. Admittedly, some language is irredeemable.
We have to remember that almost everything we say now will someday be seen at least somewhat like the critique you offer of the Covenant Prayer.
What a brilliant idea of revising Wesley’s Covenant Prayer just like creating our own personal land acknowledgment! This is such introspective work of our calling in an ever changing time and place. Our Creator reigns and we continue to walk into sanctifying grace- perfection as it is. With your permission I am sharing it in my sermon, friends getting to know more of our founder and meeting with our Youth 2023! God bless your ministry always