Do you know what RP Global Mission’s (RPGM) first mission field was? Let me give you a moment to think about it.

What is your guess?

Most of you probably said Syria or Cyprus or China. Those are all good guesses, but they are also all wrong. Little is said of the RPCNA’s first foray into global missions, because there is little to be said about it.

In 1818, Synod appointed a committee to look into establishing a foreign mission field. After much research and decades of preparations, the committee chose to start a work in Haiti. Synod called, trained, and prepared a missionary to lay the groundwork for this field. This worker arrived on the field in the early 1840s. Very shortly after his arrival in Haiti—despite years of preparatory investment—he parted ways from the RPCNA after he became convinced of a major theological diversion. “So, neither he who plants nor he who waters is anything, but only God who gives the growth” (1 Cor. 3:7).

As I was thinking what to write this article about, Keith Mann, program manager of RPGM Short Term, mentioned that he often gets asked about how RP Global Missions chooses and establishes fields. A day or two later, I ran across a meme that said, “Just once, I want the opportunity to dramatically swipe everything off a table to make room for a giant map that I’ll use to explain the plan” (@asherperlman, on X).

Kidding aside, the work of RPGM is kind of like that—but maybe not quite that dramatic. RPGM fields are typically selected in one of two ways:

1. Strategically
2. Responsively

Strategically Selected Fields

Strategically selected fields are identified through the giant-map-on-the-table method, figuratively speaking. If I were to guess, I think that most people believe this is the ordinary means RPGM uses for selecting new fields. While we do enlist this method, it is second to the responsive method, which I’ll cover below.

The missional needs of our world are great. God has called us to go into all the nations, bringing the gospel, baptizing believers, and establishing churches. As the global missions arm of the RPCNA, RPGM intentionally looks across the globe to see if there are opportunities where we could serve in areas that are unreached or at least underreached. This is how our work in Central Asia got started. We are also in the early stages of exploring a possible hub in Southeast Asia, and there are conversations about several other areas in the world.

Some of the questions we ask when employing this method are:

• Is there a need? (For example, is there already a confessionally Reformed mission there; if so, would it be better to come alongside them in their field work or does it make sense to work side-by-side with them, adding our field work to their existing work?)
• Are there missionary candidates and/or other laborers who could serve in this field?
• Do we have particular knowledge, expertise, and resources for working in this area?
• Is this an area RPGM has a particular interest in? (Are there those connected to RPGM who have a particular burden for this part of the world/people group/religious block?)

Most importantly, we are driven by prayer and the leading of the Holy Spirit. That might sound like a platitude, but it absolutely is true. Time and again an idea will arise from someone’s lips and the next thing we know connections come out of the woodwork, people rise up, and resources fall at our feet. At first this might sound fantastic (in the traditional sense of the word), but I am sure you too have experienced this kind of leading from the Lord. You know, those times where He confirms your direction by providing exactly what you need to step out into what once seemed impossible (or at least improbable). Even then, there comes a point where we must step out in faith, trusting the Spirit’s leading.

Responsively Selected Fields

While I believe we must be seeking to identify potential mission fields using the strategic method above, the reality is that most of our fields are selected responsively. I believe that God does this to 1) bring maximum glory to Himself; and 2) to honor our faith-filled efforts.

When I served as an RPGM board member, I walked in to my first board meeting not knowing quite what to expect. In this meeting, we heard for the first time proposals for work in two different areas of South Asia. This was not coordinated by human efforts. They were two different things the Lord was doing through two different presbyteries in two different countries through very different means. In both cases, God brought people from these two countries to the RPCNA through remarkable circumstances. The strategies were different. But, in both cases, these opportunities basically fell into our laps. God brings people to us and we get to be a part of what they are doing, assisting them in various ways.

After they are brought to us, we still need to decide whether to move forward with responsively selected fields. Our criteria for determining this are similar to the above method, but some of those questions are already answered or partially answered in these cases, making them a bit more streamlined. However, since this type of field often comes to us already in motion, we typically have to work out relational lines and undo some things that don’t fit our missiology and policies. This can be messy. Mistakes are easily made. But we pray things are better aligned, relationships are stronger, and efforts are coordinated on the other side of the process.

Sometimes, however, responsively selected fields can be brand new fields. In these situations, someone from outside of RPGM (but typically within the RPCNA) brings a proposal to the board. The start of our work in China in the 1800s is an example of this. Our work in South Sudan in the early 2000s is another such example. In both cases, the Lord raised up a visionary who advocated for work to be started in these lands. In the case of China, one man, year after year, stood up at Synod asking them to begin a work in China. And year after year, the answer was no. But he persisted and finally, when the time was right, the answer was yes! It also took Vince Ward many years working together with the RPGM board before the work in Sudan (now South Sudan) was given the go-ahead.

While, in one sense, responding to other people’s work and vision is easier for RPGM than coming up with the ideas from within, I believe that God most often does this when RPGM is faithfully looking over the giant map on the table, searching for strategic opportunities. Don’t you love it when God does this? It’s like when you are at the airport looking and looking in the crowd for that friend you haven’t seen in years, and then you feel a tap on your shoulder and turn to find them standing right behind you. Just because they found you first doesn’t decrease the joy. But that happy reunion wouldn’t have happened at all if you had stayed at home watching TV instead. God delights in honoring our faithful efforts, but often does so in ways where we can’t deny it is His hand working to produce the fruit.

The Best Method

At the end of the day, which method is best? This is like asking if a congregation should be involved in local or global ministry in order to grow. That is the wrong perspective. The best method: know the Word, obey God, pray, listen to the Holy Spirit, follow His direction, step out in faith, be good stewards, and seek first the kingdom. This requires a both–and approach.

Whether we are responding to opportunities or strategizing to create new ones, after all of this, sometimes God redirects us. Thinking back to the “epic failure” in Haiti, I would love to be able to travel back in time and sit in on the committee meetings following this fallout. Knowing what I know now—specifically that, through those events, God diverted them from Haiti to Syria a short time later and that the work in Syria produced what remains today as the largest faithful, evangelical church in Syria—I like to think that they discussed many lessons learned. I like to think they counted the unexpected fruit from those efforts. I would venture to guess that, while they grieved the closing of one door, they rejoiced at the opening of a new one. I trust they glorified the Lord because they knew that it is “only God who gives the growth” (1 Cor. 3:7). We must always remember that His ways are better than our ways, so what we think is going to be our next big thing might be the thing He takes away from us to teach us and eventually lead us to His next big thing.