Sean Hannity Explains Why He Left the Catholic Church — And Raises Questions About Faith in America

In a candid conversation that has reignited discussions about faith and personal conviction in America, conservative commentator Sean Hannity recently spoke with former ESPN anchor Sage Steele about his decision to leave the Catholic Church. The revelation, first reported months ago, came during a period of heightened public attention on religion and politics, including exchanges between former President Donald Trump and Pope Leo that captured headlines and social media commentary alike.

Hannity’s admission has prompted debate not only about his personal beliefs but also about the challenges facing contemporary American Catholics navigating questions of doctrine, practice, and institutional authority.

The Announcement

Hannity, a long-time public figure and prominent voice on Fox News, first made waves when he disclosed his departure from the Catholic Church. In interviews, he cited frustrations with Church leadership, doctrinal disagreements, and personal convictions as motivating factors. The timing coincided with the publicized “correspondence” between Trump and Pope Leo, which Hannity and others described as tense and occasionally overblown in media coverage.

Now, in an extended dialogue with Steele, herself a practicing Catholic who has also wrestled with questions of faith, Hannity elaborated on the reasons behind his decision, offering insights into both his understanding of Catholic doctrine and the ways he perceives it intersecting with modern life.

Faith and the Eucharist

One of the most striking elements of Hannity’s discussion was his affirmation of the central Catholic doctrine of the Eucharist. Hannity explained that he continues to believe in the real presence of Christ in the bread and wine—a belief attested to in the Gospels and reinforced by centuries of Church teaching.

Scripture offers explicit reference to this belief:

John 6:55-56: “My flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him.”
Matthew 26:26-28: During the Last Supper, Jesus took bread, broke it, and gave it to His disciples, saying, “Take, eat; this is my body.” Similarly, He offered the cup, stating, “This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.”

Hannity emphasized that he believes these teachings, a stance consistent with historical Christian thought. Early Church figures like St. Ignatius of Antioch and St. Justin Martyr wrote extensively about the Eucharist as the body and blood of Christ, underscoring its centrality to Christian worship.

Yet, despite his affirmation of the Eucharist, Hannity has left the Catholic Church. This contradiction prompted questions about what motivates a person to depart from an institution whose core teachings they accept. Hannity’s reasoning, he said, stems less from doubt about doctrine than from disagreements over institutional practices and decisions.

Priestly Celibacy and Church Discipline

Among the issues Hannity cited is the discipline of priestly celibacy. He expressed concern that the requirement for priests to remain unmarried reduced the pool of potential candidates and, in his view, limited the Church’s vitality.

Catholic theologians, however, note that celibacy has deep scriptural and historical roots. Jesus Himself discussed celibacy in Matthew 19:10-12, telling His disciples that while not everyone can embrace celibacy, those who are called to it can dedicate themselves fully to God. The Apostle Paul reiterates this sentiment in 1 Corinthians, encouraging believers to consider singleness as a path to spiritual devotion.

Celibacy, then, is not arbitrary but a discipline intended to enable priests to focus entirely on their spiritual mission. Yet, for some like Hannity, it becomes a point of personal tension—particularly when weighed against contemporary expectations of clergy and societal norms.

Conversations with Sage Steele

Hannity’s discussion with Steele went beyond institutional concerns, delving into the personal and experiential dimensions of faith. Steele, who also identifies as Catholic, shared that she has wrestled with her own questions about the Church, a reflection of the broader cultural trend of religious introspection in the United States.

Their conversation touched on the nature of salvation, assurance of heaven, and personal responsibility in faith. Steele recounted her journey of conversion and spiritual discovery, illustrating how individual experiences shape religious belief. Hannity emphasized that while he grew up Catholic and values the teachings he received, he ultimately sought a path that reconciled personal convictions with his understanding of Scripture.

Theological Tensions: Catholicism vs. Reformed Traditions

A significant portion of the discussion revolved around differing theological frameworks, particularly regarding the doctrine known as the “perseverance of the saints,” a hallmark of Reformed and Baptist theology. This doctrine posits that God’s saving grace decisively ensures the ultimate perseverance of the elect. Scripture passages often cited include John 10:27-29 and Romans 8:29-30, which emphasize God’s sovereignty and the security of those chosen by Him.

The Catholic perspective, by contrast, emphasizes cooperation with grace. While God’s grace initiates salvation, humans have the capacity to respond or resist. Romans 11:20-22 and 2 Peter 3:17-18 highlight the tension between divine mercy and human responsibility, illustrating that faith is an ongoing journey rather than a predetermined guarantee.

Hannity’s alignment with Reformed theology through his conversion raised questions for many observers. While he appreciates the assurance provided by doctrines like perseverance, critics argue that abandoning the Catholic framework in favor of a later-developed theological system may overlook the continuity of the Church’s historical witness.

Historical Foundations of Catholicism

One of the most important considerations in this discussion is the Church’s historical rootedness. Catholicism traces its authority and sacramental life back to Jesus Christ and the apostles. Practices like the Eucharist, baptism, and hierarchical leadership are seen as divinely instituted and historically continuous.

Hannity’s departure, then, represents not merely a theological choice but a disconnection from a living tradition that extends nearly two millennia. For many Catholics, this raises concerns about continuity and fidelity to the foundational teachings of Christ Himself.

The Role of Personal Conviction

Hannity’s reasoning also underscores the tension between personal conviction and institutional loyalty. In a time of widespread skepticism toward organized religion, many Americans find themselves negotiating this balance. Steele’s engagement with Hannity reflects a broader cultural moment: faith is increasingly understood as both deeply personal and yet inevitably mediated through tradition and community.

The conversation highlights how individual experience can drive spiritual decisions, even when doctrinal agreement remains. Hannity affirms core teachings like the real presence in the Eucharist while challenging administrative and cultural elements of the Church.

Scripture and Salvation

Central to Hannity and Steele’s dialogue was the question of assurance: can one know they are saved? Steele shared her perspective, emphasizing humility before God and reliance on Scripture. Hannity responded with acknowledgment of human limitation, stressing that salvation is ultimately a divine gift rather than a human entitlement.

John 3:16—“For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall have everlasting life”—was invoked as a foundational assurance. Similarly, Jesus’ promise on the cross to the repentant thief illustrates the centrality of faith over institutional affiliation.

This reflects the Catholic understanding that while the Church provides the ordinary means of grace, ultimate salvation rests in God’s mercy and human response to that grace. The dialogue also highlighted the importance of prayer, scripture study, and engagement with the sacraments as stabilizing practices for faith amid doubt or cultural challenge.

Cultural and Institutional Considerations

Hannity’s departure also speaks to a broader critique of institutional behavior within the Church. Concerns about transparency, discipline, and adaptation to modern life have prompted introspection among many Catholics. Yet, commentators note that challenges of administration and human imperfection do not negate doctrinal truth or the efficacy of sacramental life.

The conversation between Hannity and Steele exemplifies the struggle to reconcile personal convictions with institutional fidelity—a struggle many Americans, regardless of denomination, experience in an era of rapid cultural change.

Lessons for Catholic Laity

From a Catholic perspective, the Hannity-Steele dialogue serves as a case study in navigating personal faith, doctrinal fidelity, and institutional critique. It highlights several enduring principles:

Faith is both personal and communal.

Historical continuity matters.

Grace and cooperation.

Navigating doubt.

Conclusion

Sean Hannity’s explanation for leaving the Catholic Church offers a rare glimpse into the intersection of personal conviction, institutional critique, and theological inquiry in modern American life. While he affirms key elements of Catholic doctrine, including the Eucharist, his departure reflects broader questions about authority, cultural adaptation, and personal alignment with religious practice.

Sage Steele’s engagement in the conversation highlights the ongoing dialogue among American Catholics about faith in an increasingly complex and often secular world. Their discussion serves as a reminder that questions about belief, identity, and institutional trust are not merely individual—they resonate across communities and generations.

For those navigating similar spiritual questions, the Hannity-Steele conversation emphasizes discernment, study of Scripture, reflection on historical teaching, and reliance on personal prayer and sacramental life. As Hannity and Steele illustrate, engagement with these issues is not merely academic—it is deeply personal, often challenging, and ultimately rooted in a desire to reconcile faith with conscience and life experience.

Whether Hannity returns to the Church, remains in a Protestant or Reformed tradition, or continues to explore his faith independently, the conversation underscores a perennial truth: religious identity is not static, and personal conviction often must grapple with history, doctrine, and culture in profound ways.

In the end, the question for Catholics and others alike is not simply whether one remains in a particular institution, but whether faith—formed in Scripture, sacrament, and reflection—remains steadfast amid the evolving landscape of modern life.