Church Growth in the midst of war
Full-scale war has radically altered the conditions under which Ukrainian churches operate. Occupation, hostilities, forced displacement of the population, destruction of infrastructure and the mass migration of ministers have left religious communities facing the threat of downsizing or ceasing their activities altogether. At the same time, a number of churches, especially in de-occupied and frontline areas, have seen a noticeable numerical growth. People who previously had no experience of regular church attendance have begun attending services; the number of conversions, baptisms and new ministers has increased.
This text has been prepared for a special issue of Vista Journal on the Ukrainian church and mission in the fifth year of the full-scale war. The article therefore serves mainly a contextual purpose: it does not describe the full range of church mission but analyses one specific phenomenon — the growth of some Protestant congregations under crisis conditions.
In this study, congregation size is not equated to spiritual maturity or biblical faithfulness. However, quantitative measures are used as an accessible and comparable measure of the extent to which a church is able to maintain its viability, attract people and expand its ministry. The conclusions were developed inductively: by comparing the practices of churches that have experienced growth and by synthesising the testimonies of their ministers and members.
The claim of growth should not be understood as uniform growth across all Protestant churches, but rather as documented positive trends within specific denominations and regions. According to the Razumkov Centre, the proportion of citizens identifying as members of Protestant and Evangelical churches rose from 1.4 per cent in 2023 to 2.5 per cent in 2024 and 2.6 per cent in 2025, despite the methodological limitations of wartime research. Denominational statistics also confirm this growth: the Ukrainian Christian Evangelical Church reported 4,618 baptisms in 2023 and positive trends in frontline regions; The European Baptist Federation, citing Ukrainian Baptists, reported 86 new churches and 10,154 baptisms during the first three years of the full-scale war.
The available material does not provide grounds for compiling a universal ranking of factors or the establishing of a direct cause-and-effect relationship. However, it does allow us to identify consistent patterns that recurred across different regions and communities. Regional variations must also be taken into account. The most notable examples of growth were recorded in territories that had experienced occupation and were later liberated, as well as in frontline or near-frontline areas under Ukrainian government control. It was precisely in these places that public trust in churches was often shaped by their conduct during this critical period. Ukrainian communities abroad were not included in this analysis because the migration context requires a separate methodology.
Research methodology
The study combined several methods of data collection and verification. Between 2023 and 2024, desk-based research was carried out. This involved the monitoring of national media, social media, news channels, information resources of Protestant associations, as well as publications and blogs by church leaders.
The main qualitative method consisted of over 40 semi-structured in-depth interviews with church ministers at various levels: leaders of denominations, bishops, regional pastors, local church pastors, youth leaders, and other senior clergy. Respondents were informed of the project’s aims and that the information obtained would be used anonymously and consent for the publication of personally identifiable quotes was sought separately. To verify the findings, additional interviews were conducted with leaders of church organisations, regional ministers and church members.
The quantitative component consisted of a questionnaire administered during church and educational events. A total of 35 questionnaires were analysed. The sample included representatives of Baptist, Evangelical Christian, Pentecostal, Charismatic, and Mennonite congregations. In addition, around ten written or oral responses were received from socially active individuals who do not belong to Protestant churches.
Qualitative data was analysed through inductive thematic coding and comparative case analysis. Firstly, recurring thematic units were identified from the interviews, questionnaires and parallel discussions: types of decisions, ministry practices, descriptions of growth, leadership crises, and changes in worship and language practices. These units were then grouped into broader themes and compared between congregations experiencing significant growth and those without such growth. The final six factors were formulated as broader themes that recurred across various interviews and were corroborated by questionnaires and desk-based research.
As the aim was to identify effective practices, particular attention was paid to ministers of growing congregations. At the same time, interviews with ministers from churches showing no noticeable numerical growth accounted for approximately half of the sample. This allowed for a comparison of different models of operation, bearing in mind that, in wartime conditions, the very survival of the congregation is also an important indicator of resilience.
These methodological limitations do not mean that external factors were ignored. On the contrary, war, societal trauma, loss of home, forced displacement, the need for food and safety, as well as disillusionment with various institutions, created a new space for interaction between society and church communities. However, these factors were treated as context rather than as a subject of analysis in their own right. This article explores which internal practices enabled churches to respond to these external challenges.
1. Leadership as a source of trust and organisational resilience
Church growth was most often associated with mature, courageous, and approachable leadership. In wartime conditions, the importance of the pastor was determined not only by the quality of their preaching or administrative skills, but by their presence alongside the people, their willingness to share in the danger, to open their own home, and to maintain personal relationships. One respondent described such a minister as someone in whose presence others feel warmth, acceptance and trust: “A pastor capable of establishing a congregation is a minister ‘who radiates warmth’; he opens his home, befriends people and does not limit relationships to formal ministry.”
Personal courage and self-sacrifice took on particular importance. Congregations held in high regard pastors who remained with their people during the occupation, returned to ministry immediately after the territory was liberated, or supported scattered church members. Such behaviour created moral capital that could not be replaced by formal status.
A second critical element was the ability to make decisions when information was limited. Ministers had to decide how to use buildings and resources, organise evacuations, delegate authority, consider how to redeploy personnel, and formulate positions on the war, mobilisation, chaplaincy, and emigration. In areas under relatively long occupation, such as parts of the Kharkiv or Kherson regions, they also had to think about relations with Russian or Crimean religious circles. In a crisis situation, uncertainty concealed behind general spiritual platitudes undermined trust more than an honest acknowledgement of the complexity of the issue.
Love for people, practised rather than merely professed, proved to be a key factor. In situations of general vulnerability, people were especially sensitive to the difference between sincere attention and the formal delivery of a programme, between focus on a target and focus on relationships. New visitors assessed not only the amount of assistance received, but also how they were treated. When a person was seen as the focus of ministry, rather than as a means to statistical growth, they were more likely to remain in the congregation and bring others along. As onerespondent put it, “Christ did not die for the church’s programmes… He died for people. When people are the goal, not a means to an end, they remain in the congregation and bring friends along.”
At the same time, authoritarianism, an inability to admit mistakes, the defence of one’s pre-war reputation at any cost, and replacing responsibility with claims of a special spiritual position all limited development. In wartime, communities did not need an infallible leader, but an honest and responsible minister capable of calling a spade a spade, correcting wrong decisions, and remaining true to the values they proclaimed. Oleksandr Savych emphasises this in his interview: “I realised one important thing about leadership: during a crisis, the mission remains unchanged, but the methods of achieving it may change…In times of crisis, we need leaders who have faith and vision.”
2. Teamwork, discipleship and delegation
The war has demonstrated the limitations of a model in which all activity depends on a single strong leader. The departure of a pastor, a loss of contact or his being overwhelmed could paralyse the congregation if other ministers lacked the authority and experience to make independent decisions. The most resilient churches were those where discipleship, mentoring, and the transfer of responsibility were long-standing practices, rather than only topics at training events. As Mykhailo Cherenkov noted in his article ‘Identity of Ukrainian Evangelical Churches: Ten Key Factors and Challenges in the Context of War and Rumours of War’: “Today there are more questions than ever — about leaders and leadership, about education and enlightenment… about passing on the faith and ministry to new generations” .
A minister’s public activity did not always imply an ability to train successors. Mentoring often goes unnoticed because it happens through personal relationships, but this study supported the conclusion that mentoring is what gives a community continuity in its leadership and ministry staff: “In the post-Soviet space, public engagement was often perceived as a sign of spiritual strength, whilst unobtrusive personal work with people and the training of successors were underestimated.”
In several cases, younger brothers who had been prepared for ministry long before the invasion became the backbone of church leadership following the departure of senior leaders.
Crisis teams required a high level of mutual trust. Decisions often had to be made quickly, between unpalatable alternatives, and without the possibility of broad discussion. Therefore, the leadership’s authority was built not on being error-free, but on clear values, a track record of faithfulness, and a willingness to correct mistakes together.
Teams were most effective when they encouraged initiative, did not punish reasonable experimentation, and did not turn every failure into a conflict. In rapidly changing circumstances, what mattered was not the flawlessness of the plan, but the ability to revise it in a timely manner, whilst maintaining team unity and accountability to the community.
Therefore, strong leadership and teamwork are not mutually exclusive. A pastor’s personal authority provides direction, whilst discipleship and delegation empower the congregation to act in changing circumstances without constant centralised control.
3. Small groups as an infrastructure for growth
A system of small groups became one of the most significant organisational factors. In different communities, they functioned as house churches, prayer groups, Bible study groups, mentoring groups, support groups, or discipleship groups. Their effectiveness can be explained by several reasons.
Firstly, a small group creates an environment for identifying and developing new leaders. People learn to lead meetings, answer questions, support participants and take responsibility for a specific group of people. In many growing churches, it was the group leaders who went on to become members of the church council.
Secondly, small groups enable a swift response to the worldview and theological questions of newcomers. A Sunday sermon cannot address everyone’s individual questions, whereas a dialogue-based format facilitates catechesis, the explanation of biblical concepts, and the processing of traumatic wartime experiences.
Thirdly, small groups provide emotional support. People who have experienced loss, evacuation, occupation or prolonged stress need not only participation in a general worship service, but also have an opportunity to be heard. In this context, the group becomes a space for acceptance, prayer and direct personal support.
Fourthly, this format is organisationally flexible. It does not require a large building, complex equipment, or significant expenditure; meetings can easily be rescheduled or held during a blackout. As one minister noted, in a home group, resources are directed primarily towards people, rather than the technical aspects of the event.
Even in occupied territories, home groups have been and remain a factor in the survival of church communities, although growth can hardly be expected under such conditions.
At the same time, the effectiveness of the groups depends on the availability of trained leaders and a consistent vision from the leadership. Simply dividing a church into small gatherings does not guarantee growth. Mentoring, clear goals, regular meetings, and connection with the wider life of the church are also needed. The most successful models combined freedom for local initiative with overall leadership, appropriate methods, mentoring care, and training.
4. Changes in preaching practice
The arrival of a significant number of people without a church background forced communities to reassess the content and language of their sermons. Where new visitors made up the majority of the audience, traditional insider church terminology became a barrier. Consequently, preachers returned to foundational themes: the person of God, the nature of the Church, humanity’s standing before God, sin, salvation and the person of Christ.
This adaptation did not mean simplifying doctrine to general moral advice. On the contrary, respondents spoke of a greater emphasis on Christ-centredness and a clearer presentation of the Gospel. The practical character of preaching meant connecting the biblical text with the questions of people entering a Protestant environment for the first time.
The war also created new opportunities for public ministry. Protestant pastors were more frequently invited to conduct funerals for military personnel and civilians who did not belong to their congregations. As a result, the sermon was heard by people who had not previously attended church.
At the same time, avoiding the subjects of war, loss, fear, justice, and responsibility was seen as being disconnected from reality. Growing congregations generally did not replace the Gospel with political rhetoric, but neither did they try to preach as if the war did not exist. They looked for language that could speak simultaneously of hope, suffering, guilt, forgiveness, justice, and responsibility. Such preaching became more accessible to people who came to church not out of an interest in denominational tradition, but because of existential questions.
5. Social ministry as a practice of Christian presence
From the very first days of the invasion, churches became centres for evacuation, shelter, food, humanitarian aid and support for people affected by the war. For many Ukrainians, this was their first close encounter with Protestant communities. Social ministry broke down stereotypes, built trust, and opened up space for spiritual conversations: “Following the shelling, the church took in dozens of residents to shelter them; subsequently, people turned to those who had ministered to them during the danger with spiritual questions.”
The most effective form of assistance was that which was combined with personal relationships. Simply distributing food rarely led to long-term participation in church life. By contrast, attention to a specific need, knowing a person by name, prayer, regular communication, and involvement in shared work created a sense of dignity and belonging.
Some congregations entrusted certain forms of social ministry to people who had not yet become church members, combining practical participation with prayer and biblical mentoring.
This approach enabled people not only to receive help, but also to become active participants in serving others.
At the same time, social work carries risks. A large amount of outside aid can create an illusion of success when the number of food packages distributed replaces an assessment of the real impact on people and the community. A pastor may become a permanent logistics manager for humanitarian aid and neglect preaching, pastoral care and the training of new leaders. On this subject, the Head of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church, His Beatitude Sviatoslav, remarked: “When we are called to give everything and expect nothing in return, we begin to realise that it becomes difficult for us to love”.
Another problem is conditional aid, where receiving food is effectively contingent upon compulsory attendance at a worship service. Such a practice risks exploiting a person's vulnerability and contradicts the proclaimed principle of selfless love.
Thus, social ministry contributes to the growth of the church not in and of itself, but when it is an expression of Christian presence, respect and lasting relationships.
6. The Ukrainian language as a factor of identity and trust
The shift to using the Ukrainian language in worship became a factor whose significance grew throughout the study. It cannot be explained only by political considerations. For many believers, the Ukrainian language became a form of moral distancing from the aggressor, non-violent resistance and the restoration of their own identity.
This trend was particularly pronounced in de-occupied and frontline areas. People who had directly experienced the occupation, shelling and loss often saw Russian-language worship services as being out of step with their own experiences. In one congregation, the reaction of new worshippers to a Russian-language sermon served as a practical signal for the definitive switch to using Ukrainian.
The language change required effort on the part of the clergy, especially in traditionally Russian-speaking regions. Its importance was not only in following state policy, but also in the church's ability to hear society's emotional and cultural needs as well as its search for identity. A willingness to learn and change familiar practices strengthened trust.
New congregations emerging in frontline regions often used Ukrainian from the outset. At the same time, in places where the war had less of an impact on the community’s daily life, where a stable Russian-speaking leadership remained in place or there were hardly any new worshippers, the language shift took place more slowly. Priest Andrii Dudchenko addressed this issue at the beginning of Russia's aggression in 2014: “The Church of Christ cannot become a purely national church, even when its canonical boundaries coincide with the territorial boundaries of a single nation. On the other hand, for every nation, the Church of Christ must be felt as ‘their own’, and not as a church of strangers… However, although Christianity is universal and supranational, the church within each nation not only incorporates national culture into the Church, but, having become established, begins itself to shape that culture.”
Conclusions
The growth of Ukrainian Protestant churches during the war cannot be explained by any single factor. Six distinct factors form an interconnected system. Courageous leadership builds trust, but without a team it is quickly exhausted. Discipleship trains ministers, and small groups provide them with space to practise. Relevant and Christ-centred preaching responds to the spiritual quest of a new audience, whilst social ministry makes the proclaimed values visible. The Ukrainian language, in turn, connects church life with the experience of a society that is defending its dignity and identity. Lyudmyla Pidkuymukha, in her article ‘Identity Speaks: How Language Ideologies Are Changing Ukraine’, notes: “For Ukrainians, the Ukrainian language is much more than just the official state language. It has become a voice of resistance, an expression of political healing, cultural identity and a radical break with Russian imperialism”.
The communities that proved most resilient were those capable of simultaneously maintaining theological clarity whilst adapting the forms of their ministry. Their growth was not the result of market-driven adaptation, but of a consistent presence alongside the people, an honest reflection on the war, the delegation of responsibility, and a willingness to build new relationships. The war exposed weaknesses in pre-war models of church leadership, but at the same time accelerated the formation of communities in which authority is combined with ministry, and spiritual mission with social responsibility.
Further research should test these findings against a broader sample, compare the experiences of different Protestant denominations, and separately analyse Ukrainian communities abroad. Long-term observation will also be important: will new participants remain engaged in church life once humanitarian needs have diminished and the acute phase of the war has ended? This will make it possible to distinguish a circumstantial increase in attendance from sustained institutional and spiritual growth.
1
Mykhailo Brytsyn, Director of the Mission Eurasia Freedom Initiative