Zimbabwe’s political waters have been turbulent for more than a decade now. The political terrain has been characterised by political bickering, intimidations, violence and allegations of vote rigging. It is believed that the Lancaster House Constitution in a way aided these vices; hence the call for Zimbabwe to come up with a new constitution should be understood in this context. After the formation of the Government of National Unity, it was agreed that a new constitution be put in place before new elections are held. Thus, in February 2013, Zimbabwe held a referendum on a new constitution which was ‘resoundingly’ accepted by the people. This constitution was a result of negotiation between the three parties in the Government of National Unity, though consultative meetings were held across the country and stakeholders were asked to contribute. The church in Zimbabwe is one of the key stakeholders which made submissions for input in the new constitution. This article, therefore, explores the ecumenical bodies’ reactions and reflections on the new constitution. Data gathered through interviews and documents analysis show that the ecumenical movement’s response to the new constitutional provisions which deal with abortion, homosexuality and freedom of conscience is by and large negatively skewed.