is being a rural resident that distinguishes this group from urban residents on every single index, except for Lived Poverty and closeness to the MDC-T. This finding reinforces previous research and many other Zimbabwean studies that show the differentiation in attitude and behaviour between rural and urban citizens. When it comes to political participation such as voting, Apostolics are merely a sub-group of the general rural population, and it is this population that demonstrates affiliation for ZANUPF rather than the MDC-T. At least this was so in February 2017, but it also seems fair to conclude (see Table 7) that not all members of the Apostolic churches will support or vote for ZANU-PF: 47% of the Apostolic sub-group in this sample were reticent about stating whether they were close to a political party, and 32% were similarly reticent about stating which political party they would vote for. The “rural factor” is once again implicated as a major determinant in political participation, but we are really no closer to understanding this in any detailed manner. Religion was a potentially interesting avenue to explore, but, apart from showing that one particular religion, much commented upon, does have partisan affiliation, this has merely shown the existence of a politically partisan sub-group. It is not overwhelmingly partisan, however, and the significant numbers within this group that are cautious about expressing political affiliation suggests that Apostolics are more heterogeneous than we conventionally assume. And this seems both logical and sensible, and we should be cautious about stereotyping groups. Nonetheless, members of Apostolic churches are clearly a distinct groups from other religions, and something about their cohesion or practices leads them to have greater Social Capital, less Political Fear and much greater Political Trust. If we weren’t so concerned about how they might vote, we might be inclined to see members of Apostolic churches as model citizens! 10