The rector of Georgetown’s Jesuit community, Rev. Brian McDermott, S.J., apologized to the Kennedy family last week for the University’s release of Jackie Kennedy’s personal correspondences with the late Rev. Richard McSorley, S.J. The damage had already been done, but McDermott tried to rectify the situation as much as possible. However, the apology failed to reconcile the University with both the Kennedy family and the public, and instead only served to further cast the University in a negative light to a national audience.
McSorley gave Kennedy spiritual guidance for several years after the assassination of her husband. A longtime friend of the Kennedy family, McSorley left his correspondences with the former first lady to the University library after his death. The University released the letters for public viewing to coincide with the Oct. 12 visit to campus of Kennedy biographer Thomas Maier. McSorley, who had kept the existence of the letters secret from even the Kennedy family, let Maier include excerpts from the correspondences in his new book, The Kennedys: America’s Emerald Kings.
In the rush to contribute “new insight” into a national tragedy, the release of these documents needlessly violates Kennedy’s privacy, which should be protected after her death just as vehemently as it was during her life. The University, at the behest of the Jesuit Community, has since restricted access to the letters, but as copies now exist, the damage is done.
According to the Washington Post, a spokeswoman for Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) said that the University contacted the family last week “to express their regret that the letters had been made public by mistake.” While the family certainly deserves an official apology from Georgetown, the University’s insistence that the letters were published “by mistake” calls into question the sincerity of the apology; the University should regret its decision to expose the letters, but the public and deliberate manner in which they were released-a press conference-clearly indicates that it was no accident.
While a sincere public apology is still in order, the mishandling of the situation yet again mars the University’s reputation to a widespread audience.
