08/11/2026
Can Authority Bring About Unity?
Luke 20:1-8
Rabbi Rev. Michael H. Koplitz
Luke 20:1 On one of the days while He was teaching the people in the temple and preaching the gospel, the chief priests and the scribes with the elders confronted Him, 2 and they declared, saying to Him, “Tell us by what authority You are doing these things, or who is the one who gave You this authority?” 3 But He replied to them, “I will also ask you a question, and you tell Me: 4 “Was the baptism of John from heaven or from men?” 5 They discussed among themselves, saying, “If we say, ‘From heaven,’ He will say, ‘Why did you not believe him?’ 6 “But if we say, ‘From men,’ all the people will stone us to death, since they are convinced that John was a prophet.” 7 And so they answered that they did not know where it came from. 8 And Jesus said to them, “Neither am I telling you by what authority I do these things.”
In chapter 20 of Luke’s Gospel, Jesus has arrived in Jerusalem for what Christians often call Passion Week. Events begin to unfold rapidly as Jesus approaches the climax of His earthly ministry. In verses 1-8, the chief priests and elders, representatives of the Sanhedrin, confront Him with a significant question: “By what authority are you doing these things?”
The Sanhedrin served as the governing council of Judea and bore responsibility for preserving the integrity of Jewish teaching and practice. From their perspective, it was a reasonable question. They wanted to know the source of Jesus’ authority and the theological tradition with which He identified. Was He aligned with the Pharisees, the Sadducees, the Essenes, or another movement altogether?
In those days, religious teachers were typically trained under a recognized rabbi for many years. When their training was complete, they were authorized to teach and interpret Scripture. Religious authority was not generally self-appointed; it was expected to come through recognized channels of education, mentorship, and approval.
In many ways, the modern church functions similarly. Different denominations and independent churches may have varying procedures, but most establish standards for those who are called to serve as pastors and teachers. Historically, churches have required some form of theological education, credentialing, or ordination before entrusting individuals with the responsibility of preaching and administering the sacraments.
Why has the church often insisted on such qualifications? The primary reason is to preserve the faithful interpretation of Scripture. Church leaders have sought to ensure that what is taught from the pulpit is consistent with the theological convictions and traditions of the community. There has also been a concern that the sacraments be administered with care and understanding, according to the church’s teachings.
Consider a simple analogy. Imagine a renowned chef preparing a carefully crafted meal. If a waiter were to pick up the plate and decide to cover the food with extra salt before serving it, the chef would likely be displeased. The waiter would have altered something he did not create. Similarly, church traditions have frequently sought to prevent individuals from changing foundational teachings without sufficient knowledge or accountability.
This concern becomes especially evident when discussing the sacrament of Communion. Over the centuries, Christian traditions have developed liturgies that guide the celebration of the Lord’s Supper. While practices vary among denominations, many elements have remained remarkably consistent throughout church history.
I once attended an independent church where Communion was being celebrated. To my surprise, the pastor omitted what many traditions consider key elements of the liturgy, including the Great Thanksgiving and the Epiclesis, the prayer asking the Holy Spirit to bless the bread and cup. Having studied the history and theology of Communion and having administered the sacrament for more than twenty-five years, I found this omission troubling. To many in the congregation, however, the service was meaningful and spiritually significant.
This experience raised an important question: By what authority did this pastor conduct Communion in the manner that he did? The answer was that the authority had been granted by the church itself through its leadership and governing elders. Whether one agrees with their decision or not, they had entrusted him with that responsibility.
Ultimately, this brings us back to the broader question of authority. Is formal education necessary for church leadership? I believe theological education is extremely valuable and that those who administer the sacraments should understand their historical and theological significance. At the same time, many faithful believers may not perceive the distinctions that theologians and clergy consider significant.
The issue becomes even more complex when we consider the unity of the church. If Christians are ever to achieve greater unity across denominational lines, agreement about the meaning and administration of the sacraments would seem to be an essential step. Yet history shows how difficult that task has been. Efforts to establish theological consensus have often produced further disagreement rather than greater unity. Various traditions continue to hold differing views concerning the nature and purpose of Communion.
As a result, Christian unity remains an ongoing challenge. Independent churches continue to develop their own practices, while established denominations maintain their historic traditions. Bridging these differences is no easy task.
This reality is particularly sobering because Jesus prayed for unity among His followers. Yet disagreements have existed from the earliest days of the church. The New Testament itself records significant disputes among Christian leaders as they sought to understand how best to carry out Christ’s mission. Despite their differences, however, they shared a common commitment to proclaiming the gospel.
Perhaps that is where hope for unity still resides today. We may not agree on every doctrine, tradition, or liturgical practice, but we can choose to recognize one another as fellow servants of Christ. Instead of focusing on competition or institutional survival, we can devote ourselves to the work of God’s kingdom.
I once heard a pastor remark that he was waiting for the church across the street to fail so that his congregation could grow. Such thinking reflects a spirit of competition rather than a spirit of Christ. The success of one church should not depend upon the failure of another. Rather, believers should rejoice whenever the gospel is faithfully proclaimed and lives are transformed.
Perhaps one day the church will more fully embody the unity that Jesus envisioned: a community marked by love, mutual support, and a shared commitment to serving Him. Until then, each of us can do our part by seeking understanding, extending grace, and remembering that we are ultimately called to be one body working together for the glory of Christ.
