I find that the article, while somewhat long on aspiration and even on condemnation, is short on possible solutions to a difficult problem. I am also a little puzzled by his statement that "some people are firmly committed to the concept of academic selection at eleven". I don't know any such people locally. Indeed, the only Catholic school which is planning an academic test has made clear that this is only an interim measure whicle awaiting direction from the N.I. Executive.

There are some questions he would do well to address.

He states quite bluntly that academic selection is unjust. Does he mean that it is also unjust for entry at 14 to specific courses as in Craigavon, at 16 for entry to A-levels or at 18 for entry to university?
He states that "there should not be a school in one area of a town with only 6.1% of pupils on free school meals while a couple of miles away another school has 62.3% of pupils on free school meals". Does he therefore condemn Ms. Ruane's plan for neighbourhood comprehensive schools? If so, how does he avoid the creation of such schools, which clearly facilitate social selection?

He does not find it "acceptable to promote and facilitate an unjust and discriminatory system in the name of freedom of choice".
Would he favour Ms. Ruane's opposing extreme of abolishing freedom of choice, a parental right long supported by Church and State? It does seem obvious that enrolment at the neighbourhood comprehensive is Ms. Ruane's chosen option.

It is an option which, in England, is widely recognised to have failed boys in deprived urban areas.

I am glad he highlights the special attention that should be given to the weakest, because in both Northern Ireland and in the much lauded Southern Ireland system, there is an estimated 20% who have not reached an adequate standard in literacy. This, being severely damaging both to the individuals and to society, is a more urgent problem than academic selection and could have been addressed without any controversy.
It is regrettable to see a younger priest calling for the weight of Episcopal intervention to fall upon any Catholic schools that do not conform in every respect to their educational views.

It is not a time for wielding crosiers, rather for seeking to meet the aspirations for their children of as many parents as possible. It would be good if Paul were to visit the schools of which he disapproves, and possibly be surprised by the Christian, personal and social development they promote in their students, who are not, as he seems to think, "simply educated to pass exams and gain certificates."

Their teachers are aware that the development of each person's full potential is dependent upon the living-out of the full Catholic vision of education in an environment of enjoyment, respect and friendship.
If he were to do so, he might come to realise the treasure we have in these schools, and begin to think more deeply about how to build upon and to bring more closely together the excellent grammar and secondary schools which we possess.

A final thought for Paul. He envisages an education which will lead to striving "to build communion with those from different faiths".

In the present educational crisis, might not this involve taking on board the views, not just of our own politicians, but also of the DUP and UUP representatives of the great majority of Protestant parents?
There is no simple easy solution, but it is far from impossible to devise a new transfer system which would satisfy most N.I. parents.
All people need to be open to changing their views.

Msgnr. Ignatius McQuillan,
Derry