See No Evil

S.F. Archbishop William Levada styles himself as a leading advocate for openness among Catholic leaders on the clergy sex-abuse issue. So why doesn't he practice what he preaches?

Comments (0) By Ron Russell Wednesday, May 21 2003

But Emile Lacampagne says that isn't true.

"I find that extremely offensive, both to me and to my daughter," he says. "No one from the archdiocese, including Bishop Wester, ever spoke to me about my daughter's allegations. Had they done so, I would have told them the same thing I'm telling you, which is that I support Danielle 100 percent in what she said happened to her, and always have."

San Francisco Archbishop William J. Levada, then (above) and now (top): His handling of abuse cases has drawn the ire of victim advocates.

As auxiliary bishop of San Francisco in 1997, current San Jose Bishop Patrick J. McGrath figures prominently in the saga of whistle-blower Father John Conley.

More About

Pressed about whether he told Carter that Emile Lacampagne had expressed such doubts, Wester declined to answer. "That was a personal conversation ... I don't tell that kind of thing."

Carter's reinstatement has hardly calmed the waters. Besides Lacampagne's allegations, Belmont parishioners recently witnessed their pastor openly challenging the archbishop's order reassigning him to another parish. Carter has taken the extraordinary step of soliciting parishioners to write letters to Levada asking that he be allowed to stay.

Neither do Levada's headaches involving Conley, his whistle-blower priest, appear to be over. Although the court gag order prevents full disclosure of the controversial -- and apparently costly -- settlement the archdiocese entered into with Conley until next year, it does not indefinitely bar the priest from discussing his ordeal. And that could spell more unpleasantness for the archdiocese.

Conley intends to write a tell-all book.