Zimbabwe has been found wanting when faced with extreme violence by the State. Dube calls for a theology that promotes the health and well-being of all instead of the prevailing situation where only the ruling elite is assured of a decent quality of life. He contends that only a preferential option for the excluded will ensure the Church's relevance. On his part, Chindomu (2006) approached "Operation Murambatsvina/Restore Order" from the perspective of liberation theology and charged that the State had subjected citizens to inhuman treatment and that it needed to uphold the dignity of the poorest of the poor.Emerging in a tense context, theologies of resistance in Zimbabwe have sought to question the ruling elite's theologies of entitlement. As noted by Chitando (2005a), in Mugabe's ideology, his party delivered freedom and independence to the black majority. In addition, they availed land to the landless and promoted indigenisation and economic empowerment to the marginalised. Therefore, they had a divine right to rule. Those who opposed his rule were running dogs of imperialism, since all true sons and daughters of the soil appreciated his party's revolutionary credentials. Theologies of resistance in Zimbabwe emerged to question this narrative and highlighted the manipulation of religion by politicians. Although some church leaders such as Nolbert Kunonga endorsed Mugabe's rhetoric (Gunda 2008) and there was contestation regarding the prophetic ministry of the Church (Vengeyi 2010), we argue that as the socio-economic and political environment in Zimbabwe worsened around 2006/2008, Zimbabwean theologians and scholars of religion became more vocal in challenging the status-quo. Gunda (2006) called upon biblical studies scholars and the Church to adopt a prophetic stance in the face of the deepening crisis. Challenging the liberators: a critical analysisTheologians and scholars of religion have been quite courageous and creative in challenging the abuse of power in Zimbabwe. As the foregoing sections have illustrated, they have not withdrawn into their protective shells but they have sought to be contextually relevant. For theologians and scholars of religion operating within state-sponsored institutions, there have been no guarantees of personal safety. However, to be fair to Mugabe's regime, academic freedom has not been stifled and robust debate has been allowed. It is only when critics proceed to organise the masses that the regime has not been tolerant as the cases of violence against political activists indicate.Despite paying attention to the context and facilitating the emergence of new voices, there are a number of factors that must be addressed in order to enhance the social relevance of Zimbabwean scholars of theology and religious studies. First, the discourse tends to be scholarly and elitist, even when addressing lived realities such as the land question. There is a disconnect between the people of God in the townships, villages and mountain tops and the university professors of theology and religious studies. Could it be that the powers-that-be feel far less threatened by hard-hitting articles or books in political theology than by angry, educated but unemployed youth? Second (and leading from the foregoing), publications by the scholars do not appear to reach the generality of church-based