article3
How far was the success of St-Paul’s Mission due to the position or character of the places in which he preached?
ANTIOCH-Third largest city of the province
|
When St-Paul was traveling the world, and stopping at different cities to preach in, his intentions were not to bring Christianity to these specific cities only, but rather for these cities to become centers for mission, through which the gospel can be spread to the rest of the province. Both St-Luke and St-Paul speak constantly of the provinces rather than of the cities. For example, it says that St-Paul was forbidden to preach the word in Asia [Acts 16:6]; he was called from Troas to Macedonia - it does not say called to Philippi or Thessalonica [Acts 16:9-10]; speaking of the collection of the saints, St-Paul mentions that Achaia was ready a year ago [2 Cor. 9:2]. The suggestion here is that in St-Paul’s view, the unit was the province, not just the city. The cities that were chosen, by the guidance of the Holy Spirit, were merely keys to the rest of the province.
Let us now take a quick glance at the location and character of some of these strategic cities, using St-Paul and St-Barnabas’ First Missionary Journey as an example. (See Map & City Descriptions)
One can clearly see that St-Paul was planting Churches primarily in significant cities, such as seaports, capitals, commercial centers, etc. Why? The reason is simple. Since these cities were meant to serve as centers for evangelization of the entire province, it was ideal to plant a Church in a city where many people were coming and going, buying and selling, i.e. a city with a lot of traffic, which can serve for “trafficking” the message of the Gospel as well.
Many modern missions/churches have tried to imitate this strategy by targeting major cities or capitals for planting their Churches, hoping to be as fruitful as the early Church was. Yet many of these attempts have failed. Why? Something is missing…
It is not enough for the Church to be established in a place where many are coming and going unless the people who come and go not only learn the Gospel, but learn it in such a way that they can propagate it. It has happened often that a Church has been established in an important city, and the surrounding country has been left untouched, because the gospel has been preached in such a form that the believer who received it did not understand how to spread it, nor realized that it was entrusted to him for that purpose.
What about the Coptic Church in the Lands of Immigration?
In terms of location, the Coptic Church today has Churches in most major cities, seaports, and capitals, e.g. London, Montreal, Vancouver, Toronto, New York, Boston, Chicago, Washington DC, Los Angeles, Frankfurt, Paris, Vienna, Sydney, Japan, etc.
Now the question is: Have we been faithful in spreading the Orthodox Faith in areas surrounding these cities, or have we left most of the country - or even city untouched? Many places that are supposed to be centers of Christianity in a strategic city rather resemble a swamp into which the best life of the city/country is collected, rather than being sent out to spread the gospel. It has been said that the measure of a church is not its seating capacity, but rather its sending capacity.
Ultimately we should ask ourselves: “Is the Coptic Orthodox Church a beacon of light and salvation in the lands of immigration, spreading the Good News of the Gospel and the true faith to all people around it?

