As this Tuesday’s election nears, New York City’s Catholic faithful, who make up roughly a third of the city’s population and could be a pivotal voting bloc within the Diocese of Brooklyn, face a profound moral decision.
The field comprises three contenders: Democratic nominee Zohran Mamdani, independent candidate Andrew Cuomo, and Republican nominee Curtis Sliwa.
Recent polls show Mamdani holding a commanding lead at around 43-46%. Cuomo, meanwhile, sits at 29-33%, and Sliwa at 15-19%.
The Church’s social doctrine demands a holistic approach: defending the unborn, supporting the poor and migrants, ensuring public safety for families, and fostering education that respects parental rights and religious freedom.
No candidate perfectly embodies this vision, but voters must discern where alignments lie, remembering that “the direct and intentional destruction of innocent human life from the moment of conception until natural death is always gravely immoral” (“Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship,” USCCB).
Mamdani, a democratic socialist and assemblyman who stunned the establishment by winning the Democratic primary, appeals to many on economic justice issues.
His platform promises rent stabilization, expanded public housing, universal childcare, and aid for immigrants, which echoes Catholic calls to care for the marginalized and welcome the stranger.
His Muslim heritage and focus on equity have also resonated with foreign-born voters, who support him in substantial numbers.
Mamdani is staunchly pro-abortion, advocating for expansive abortion rights. His past calls to “defund the police” and abolish prisons could exacerbate crime in vulnerable communities, undermining the safety that allows families to thrive.
Cuomo has moderate positions on immigration, such as balancing legal pathways with border security, which partially align with the Church’s emphasis on humane treatment of migrants while maintaining societal stability.
He actively courted faith leaders, securing endorsements from over 70 Christian clergy across boroughs, who praise his focus on affordability, safety, and opportunity, all issues central to Catholic family values. Raised Catholic and educated in parochial schools, he has invoked faith in his campaign rhetoric.
However, his record is marred by some contradictions, such as expanding abortion access, which drew condemnation from New York bishops as a betrayal of life’s sanctity.
Sliwa was also raised Catholic and frequently invokes his faith, positioning himself as a defender of life, law, and order.
He is unequivocally against abortion, supports school choice, including vouchers for religious schools, empowering parents in education, and his hard line on crime — since his founding of the Guardian Angels — addresses violence plaguing low-income neighborhoods and protecting the vulnerable as Catholic social teaching demands.
On immigration, Sliwa advocates enforcement with humane treatment, avoiding the extremes of open borders or outright rejection.
In this divided race, Catholic voters must not succumb to apathy. The Church urges us to vote as an act of moral responsibility, even when choices are imperfect.
As the late Pope Francis told us, politics should serve the common good, not ideology.
Pray for discernment and consider: Which candidate best upholds your Catholic values?
New York City’s future depends on it.