Tyler Staton is currently the pastor of Bridgetown Church in Portland, Oregon, which was pastored by John Mark Comer until Comer stepped down in 2021 to run his Practicing the Way enterprise. Staton also heads the US national chapter of Peter Greig’s 24/7 Prayer, a global prayer movement promoting contemplative practices.
Staton is very visible online, including numerous videos he has done with John Mark Comer, Peter Greig, and Tim Mackie .
This article looks mainly at two videos, though some information from other videos is discussed. One is a video of Staton speaking about prayer; the other video is Staton discussing Ruth Haley Barton and topics such as the desert fathers and silence.
(Disclaimer: Some links provided in CANA articles are for informational purposes only and do not constitute endorsement.)
Tyler Staton on Prayer
Change the Word if You Don’t Like It
In a video interview, Staton refers to “mysticism” and admits that some people don’t like that word. “So,” Staton offers, “change the vocabulary, do your own translation of it…..if it wigs you out.” He doesn’t mean anything in particular by it, he says. Then, why even use the word?
He misses the whole point. It is not the word itself but what it means. This is like saying:
“The word ‘cancer’ is scary to a lot of people, so just change the vocabulary if it wigs you out and call it something else.”
How does that make sense? But mysticism is exactly what we are dealing with concerning the Contemplative teachings in the church.
Early Church “Rythms?”
The early church for the first 300 years, according to Staton, lived by a morning, midday, and evening “prayer rhythm” where their prayers “were themed by set prayer at set times together….that was the way Jesus lived with his disciples.” Staton adds that this was “how the early church lived during her glory days.”
Question: Did the early church really have prescribed prayer three times a day? They did pray and sing the Psalms, which had been done by the Jews. I asked an expert on this area, Dr. Ron Huggins, if there were fixed prayer times in the first 300 years of the church and this is his reply:
“Most likely what Staton and McKnight are referring to is The Rule of St. Benedict, who lived in the 6th century. His rule was originally for his own followers but eventually passed on to many other orders so that it became more or less standard throughout the Middle Ages — Establishing set times of prayers throughout the day and night that are still observed. Before Benedict the matter of times of prayer is less clear, but there was certainly some idea and practice of set times going back to at least the early second century (or perhaps the first) where we find the Didache dictating how many Our Fathers must be recited each day, and what days are set aside as fast days.
I am doubtful that the whole Church had agreed upon set times before Benedict, but different places probably had different times, and some may or may not have had set times at all.” -End of Dr. Huggins’ reply
Dr Huggins added that when original prescribed times of prayer came about with Benedict, it was in monastic settings, not in churches. So there is no evidence for a formal set liturgy as a regular or widespread practice in the early church, much less that that was how “Jesus lived with his disciples” as claimed by Staton.
Even if there was a liturgical prayer practice, that would not mean it is needed now because nothing in Scripture indicates that prayer should be done that way. I have no issues with liturgical prayer – I even like it in some cases – but making a claim that the early church did it so we should do it is not valid.
In another video, Staton talks about how he says the words “Holy Spirit” as an anchor if he is distracted in prayer. He calls this a “breath prayer” and claims that it is a practice that goes “down throughout Christian history.” Breath prayers are most closely aligned with the Eastern Orthodox Church and their use of the Jesus Prayer (based on Luke 18:13 and/or Mark 10:47). Nothing in Scripture teaches “breath prayers” (nor is this what 1 Thess. 5:17 is teaching; rather, the First Thessalonians 5 passage is about being aware of God and being willing and ready to pray at any moment).
It is normal for advocates of Contemplative spirituality to misuse scripture or to misrepresent church history as a way to support their case. They do this because they do not have valid biblical grounds for what they are promoting and teaching.
Staton refers to the “glory days” of the church? Actually, that is when the church experienced persecution from various rulers in different places. The early church also dealt with many false teachers, as can be seen from almost every book in the New Testament. Staton’s use of this term seems to be referring to what he believes were the liturgical and contemplative prayers in the church that were actually part of the monastic tradition.
Going Deeper?
Staton states that there is an app called “Inner Room” which guides people in prayer three times a day, and offers instruction if one wants to “go deeper” in those areas, such as finding out about the Examen Prayer, a prayer from Ignatius of Loyola, founder of the Jesuit Order. Ignatius was one of those who battled the Reformation as part of the Counter-Reformation.
Staton calls doing this “prayer rhythm” a “fidelity to Jesus.” Staton also states that 24 hour prayer times set up at his church allow people to go “deeper.”
The ”deeper” word is a red flag. This word is used by Contemplative teachers to describe contemplative practices versus normative prayer and Bible study. In other words, in the Contemplative view, standard prayer as modeled in Scripture and Bible reading/study do not take one “deep” enough; one needs these monastic practices to allegedly go “deeper” with and closer to God.
God’s “Deep Inner Whisper”
There is a “palette” of colors for prayer and most people are unaware of this, claims Staton, they only know how to pray one way.
The host asks Staton to explain how “to train our hearts to approach prayer more as a dialogue than a monologue.”
Incorporate prayers that stretch you, answers Staton. He adds that one should try something that seems difficult, start your day with contemplative silence or a breath prayer. According to Staton, being silent is “consent;” it is saying to God,
“Hey, I’m offering you the first word before I bring you my agenda, before I engage my imagination with you through Scripture….hey, here’s the first moment of this day…I want to offer it to you.”
Yet you can also tell God it is okay if he is silent, suggests Staton, or doesn’t have a word for you.
However, prayer is not presented to Christians in Scripture as a dialogue. It is presented and modeled on the Lord’s prayer, which Jesus taught the disciples. There is nothing in what Jesus taught to suggest one should be silent or that one should try to listen for God’s voice outside of Scripture.
Furthermore, I find it an act of hubris to “offer” an opportunity to God for him to speak, as though he needed that. God does not need our consent for anything. I heard this term “consent” years ago when I was first investigating contemplative practices, and apparently that concept is still there. So “offering the first moment to God” and telling God it is okay if he is silent is an indication of the shameless presumption often seen in Contemplatives towards God.
As I have written before, the Contemplative movement/religion detracts from the majesty of God and despite all the God-talk, is very self-focused and experience-oriented.
Staton advises that if you cultivate these few moments of silence in the morning, your “ear will become more attuned to the voice of God.” This is training yourself to recognize God’s voice, Staton claims (this reminded me of the bizarre instructions given by Dallas Willard on learning to recognize God’s voice in this video and in his book, Hearing God).
Staton also suggests doing what you think God told you to do even if you are not sure that God told you that. If you mess up, that is okay. God is probably saying, “I love that you went for it,” even if it was not God whom you heard, advises Staton. This is the only way to learn to recognize the “deep inner whisper that is God’s voice.”
One must ask: did God have any problems getting the attention of the prophets or anyone else he spoke to in Scripture? No, he did not. God is more than able to speak to someone if he so desires, whether they are silent or not, whether they are listening or not, whether they offer God the chance to speak or not (not that anyone in Scripture does that). No a shred of evidence exsits in Scripture for the need to learn how to recognize the supposed “deep inner whisper” of God’s voice.
What Staton is saying is
1) It is okay to “offer” God a chance to speak
2) One may think they are hearing God when they are not, but that is okay because God indulges this and even likes it if you do what you think God told you to do, even if he said nothing to you.
There is a hubris in the first point. In the second one, what is described is a rather carefree, devil-may-care kind of god, not the God revealed in Scripture.
Elijah and the “Still Small Voice”
What Staton terms the “deep inner whisper” that is allegedly God’s voice is viewed by many as the “still small voice” of God in the account of Elijah in 1 Kings 19. However, that passage does not support the notion of listening for a voice from God or that God speaks in “a still small voice,” for many reasons, such as:
1) Elijah was a prophet; you and I are not
2) The phrase translated “soft whisper” likely refers to a noise, not a voice, and is rendered differently in various versions
3) God speaks verbally in normal words to Elijah after the “gentle stirring” Elijah hears gets his attention
4) The fact that the text says God was not in the wind or the earthquake or the fire is a contrast to the situation with Moses on Mount Sinai when the mountain shook and God came down with lightning, and answered Moses with thunder (Exodus 19:16-19). Elijah was on a mountain as was Moses but this event is being highlighted as different from the one with Moses.
Using this passage as a platform for a whole theology of a “still, small voice” — as all the Contemplatives do, not just Staton — is worse than just being thin ice as biblical support. It is more like melting ice.
Good Points Do Not Negate Concerns
The rest of the interview is a good discussion about trusting the Lord in difficult circumstances. Staton talks about the birth of his son, how they knew there would be physical problems with him, and that perhaps his son would not even make it.
This highlights another issue: Contemplative advocates can teach good things and have good insights into Scripture and living the Christian life despite unbibilcal teachings. Because they may teach some good things, people will then trust everything they teach. So because Staton may have some good insights, that does not mean he cannot teach unbiblical ideas, because he does.
I have nothing against Staton and truly sympathized with what he said about his son; it was very sincere and moving. But I cannot ignore all the things I have discussed about Staton that are problematic.
Staton, Comer, and Mackie are all, I believe, sincere in their desire to be closer to God and to teach others to do so. But they have been taken in by the Contemplative stream and are leading others to broken cisterns.
Tyler Staton and Ruth Haley Barton
A video of Tyler Staton when Staton was preparing to leave his church in Brooklyn, New York, and move to Portland, Oregon to pastor John Mark Comer’s Bridgetown Church after Comer stepped down in 2021, reveals further serious concerns.
Staton talks about attending Ruth Haley Barton’s Transforming Center (at about 19 minutes). Both Staton and the host discuss how they love Barton, and the host refers to two of her books he read. Barton’s teaching has “been huge in my life,” states Staton, and has given him a “larger toolbox for accessing the power of the Spirit.” I later heard Staton praising Barton in another interview.
Barton is one of the leading Contemplative advocates and teachers. Her books and her Transforming Center are influential. Pastors and church leaders go to her Center or on retreats to learn and practice what I think should be called the Contemplative Religion. It is a religion with its own priorities and practices, and one that misuses Scripture to support its beliefs. (To see how badly Barton misuses Scripture, read this 2-part article on Barton here and here).
Barton was schooled at the interfaith Shalem Institute for Spiritual Direction, whose book recommendations include Buddhist material. Barton herself had a mentor at Shalem, a Spiritual Director and a Buddhist named Rosemary Dougherty (look under Barton’s name listed here to see the reference to Dougherty and here to see Dougherty’s Buddhist credentials). Yet Barton is training pastors and church leaders in a supposedly Christian practice.
Barton’s influence on Staton is evident. One indication is his use of the word “rhythms” and his misuse of similar scriptures as Barton, such as the passage on Elijah.
The Idolatry of Silence
Tyler refers to the desert mothers and fathers and calls them the
“earliest Christian kind of apostolic figures after the Bible…their primary access to the power of the Holy Spirit…was silence.”
I am not sure what a “kind of apostolic figure” is, but the apostles were called by Jesus, with Paul being the last one. There were no apostles among the desert fathers or mothers. And what evidence is there that one “accesses” the Holy Spirit via silence? This statement is colossally false but sadly representative of the Contemplative idolatry of silence.
Staton states that at his church, they created a “daily prayer rhythm” and this is within “the Contemplative tradition.” He compares normative prayer to the shallow end of the pool versus Contemplative being the deep end of the pool. This is one of the most egregious claims of the Contemplative movement – to make a Christian think that regular prayer and Bible study are insufficient and “shallow” (sometimes characterized as “dry” or “heady”).
Staton refers to the “ancient discipline” of silence. It may be an ancient discipline but it is not supported in Scripture. The passages cited to claim Scripture supports a discipline of silence are taken out of context and/or have another meaning read into them. This writer has looked up every passage using the words “silence,” “silent,” “quiet,” in addition to the passages given by Contemplatives, and not a single one supports any use of being silent as a discipline or a way to be closer to God.
Staton points out that being silent is not done in order to produce something or even to hear God (though many Contemplatives do teach being silent in order to hear God, usually inwardly). Staton claims it is done so that you can become comfortable in the presence of God without speaking.
This raises the issue of being in the presence of God. First, are we not always in the presence of God? God is omnipresent and aware of everyone all the time. Secondly, is it not the case that one becomes “at ease” with God by knowing him through knowing Christ, and through prayer, worship, and the Scriptures?
Christians are adopted into God’s family upon faith in Christ (John 1:12-13; Romans 8:14-17, 9:8; Galatians 3:26, 4:3-7; 1 John1:3), that adoption is priceless and is a gift. Yet one should also respect the Lord as Creator, Judge, and Redeemer. One element missing in the Contemplative Religion is a deep respect for the majesty of God. In fact, God is usually only spoken of in terms of practices Christians should do to “be connected to” or to be “intimate” with God, to “hear” God, or to “feel” his presence or love.
The Contemplative religion damages the church because any teaching in the church not based on Scripture will do that. But it is also revealing the weak spots and false beliefs that rise to the surface when unbiblical teachings come in the door, as well as exposing those who teach them.
Short link for article: https://shorturl.at/ZuHUM