# LCMS Convention Proceedings_St. Louis Missouri_1953_S182
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

182 SEMINARIES AND COLLEGES

There is no intent, in the following recommendation, to ch
the present procedure in any way. The purpose of this pro
is to reflect in Synod’s official Handbook such clarification as
President of Synod, in accordance with the duty specif,
assigned to him, has found it necessary to convey at the beg
of each new election meeting during the past two trienniums

In approving the changes recommended to the 1947 convent,
Synod recognized the principle that it could not hold the co
president responsible for the results achieved on a given cam
without giving the president a voice in the selection of his
Synod found it desirable, also, to recognize the basic administra;
philosophy of the accrediting associations and to accept the
the extent that Synod’s distinctive objectives permitted, Acco
ingly, Synod has assigned specific duties to college and semin}
presidents or faculty committees, as the case may be, in Hand
Sections 6.103 and 6.105; however, these provisions carefully
guard the principle that all conclusions reached by presiden‘
faculty committee are subject to review, modification, or reje ctigg
by the electors.

After the recommendations have been properly prepared, ij
accordance with the basic criteria specified in Handbook Se
6.103, the electors are not free to make arbitrary selections f
the list of unrecommended nominees; however, they do have
the right and the duty to canvass the data on every nominee
the purpose of determining whether, in their judgment, .
president’s list should be amended. If, by mutual consent, the:
are additional qualified nominees, the president amends his list
include the additional candidates. In any case in which the ele
conclude that no candidate on the original or on the amended
of recommendations can properly be elected to the Position invol
or that no listed candidate can be elected without extensi'
compromising the performance of some other vital aspect sm
Synod’s work, they have the right and the duty to reject
the recommendations and to request the Board of Control to i
a new call for nominations.

The procedures detailed above are now in use at all electi
and have been accepted as a correct interpretation by the elector
however, since the detail i$ not specifically reflected in Section 6.1
and since changes of personnel in the various local or synod
administrations might occasion some conflicting interpretations
is felt that a clarification of this section will contribute to Syn
welfare and provide desirable continuity in the application of :
very important section of Synod’s constitutional law. :

There have also been. some misgivings in connection with
statement as it now appears in Section 6,117, that the electors sk